The Point Live: Ley expected to follow Nationals on net zero to extend leadership, RBA holds rates. As it happened

Independent MP Sophie Scamps has announced she can not support the government’s environmental protection legislation.

It doesn’t matter on the numbers, but it does matter when it comes to public perception of the bill. If the independents elected on a platform of climate action don’t like Labor’s landmark environmental reforms, well, that matters.

Scamps says:

I cannot in good conscience support these bills as there are so many loopholes, exemptions, omissions – and so much ministerial discretion – that there is no guarantee our nature will be protected. In fact, this bill may even weaken nature protections.”

For 25 years our weak environment laws have not been fit for purpose, and the result has been devastating. We now have 19 ecosystems on the brink of collapse and Australia leads the world in mammal extinctions and sits alongside Brazil and Bolivia as a global deforestation hotspot.”

I want urgent action to turn this around, but what’s on the table now has loopholes big enough to drive a giant heavy hauler through it. Whilst we do need greater certainty for business, we also need proper protections for nature, and these reforms catastrophically fail on the later.”

Australian nature is too precious to settle for environmental reforms that don’t address the carnage of our native forests, animals, waterways, coastlines and landscapes.”

Scamp lists her key concerns as:

• A broad and poorly defined ‘national interest’ exemption 
• Native forest logging and land clearing exemptions remain
• Weakening of the water trigger, leaving rivers at risk from big developments 
• No requirement to consider climate change impacts on nature
• Excessive ministerial discretion
• No independent appointment process for the new National Environmental Protection Agency
• Devolution of decision making to the states and territories 

We reported this yesterday, but it is worth re-visiting (again and again and again) because you are going to be hearing these lines from the Coalition A LOT and it is important to try and head these particular furphies off at the start:

As the Nationals abandon their commitment to achieving net zero by 2050, leader David Littleproud has cited a stunning $9 trillion dollar price tag on the policy as a key reason for the move.

So, will net zero really cost $9 trillion to Australia?

In a word: no.

The figure, now commonly cited by right-wing outlets like the IPA, originally came from a 2023 report from Net Zero Australia, a partnership of three universities that conducts research into net zero pathways.

Their 2023 study did say that achieving net zero required Australia to “attract and invest $7-9 trillion of capital to 2060 from international and domestic sources”. But it is nonsensical to use this number in the way Littleproud has, for three main reasons:

1. This is total capital investment, not government spending

The $7-9 trillion is the total of all the money invested my private companies building wind farms, homeowners installing rooftop solar, and someone switching to an electric vehicle when they’re due for an upgrade.

This money is also an investment, so Australia will get trillions of dollars worth of assets out the other end.

It’s pretty misleading to pretend this will cost government budgets $9 trillion, so net zero will not, as Littleproud claimed, “put things like Medicare at risk”.

2. Net cost not gross cost

The $7-9 trillion figure is only the “cost” of net zero if the alternative is zero spending on energy infrastructure, by anyone. That would mean no spending on energy generation, power lines, or even cars (including petrol) – not a realistic scenario.

Perhaps realising that their $7-9 trillion figure was easy to use in bad faith by those opposed to renewable energy, Net Zero Australia updated the figure in their 2025 report. Accounting for the capital costs of doing nothing, they now estimate that “$1.6 trillion capital investment must be unlocked to achieve net zero by 2050”. This is a fraction of the number Littleproud has been using.

According to the 2025 figure, Australia would only need an additional $64 billion in investment per year – an eminently achievable task in a country with a $1.8 trillion GDP and $735 billion government revenue annually.

3. It does not account for the costs of unmitigated climate change

Even this price tag does not take into account the costs of inaction, such as managing climate disasters. The National Climate Risk Assessment released earlier this year estimated that increased natural disasters alone would cost the Government $40 billion dollars annually.

Verdict: Gross misrepresentation.

You can read the full fact-check here.

New Australia Institute polling research shows most Australians, regardless of who they vote for, think cash-for access payments represent corrupt conduct. Cash-for-access describes exclusive fundraising events where companies and lobbyists pay to meet with senior party leaders.

The polling follows reporting of the Albanese Government’s Federal Labor Business Forum, where corporations pay up to $110,000 for privileged access to Government Ministers. Government ministers are also keeping details of the meetings secret by blocking access to ministerial diaries. The Liberal and National parties engage in similar activities, though their own business forums.

Key findings: 

• Three in five Australians (63%) think that cash-for-access payments constitute corrupt conduct. Only 12% do not. 
• Most Australians think cash-for-access constitutes corrupt conduct, regardless of voting intention. 
• Four in five Australians (82%) agree that paying for exclusive access to politicians gives corporations and special interests unfair political influence. 
• An overwhelming majority of Australians (78%) agree that politicians should refuse to participate in events where participants with a vested interest in government policies have paid for exclusive access.

“Politicians could improve public faith in democracy by ruling out taking money in a way that most Australians view as corrupt,” said Mark Ogge, Principal Advisor at The Australia Institute.

“It’s clear that cash-for-access payments completely fail the pub test.

“It’s not surprising that trust in our political system is low when the major parties are selling access to corporations vying for special treatment at the expense of ordinary Australians.”

Glenn Connley

In May 2025, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said that Australia and the United States “share values” including “democracy and the rule of law”.

However, new polling commissioned by The Australia Institute reveals that only 8% of Australians strongly agree with that statement.

Further, fewer than half of Australians think the AUKUS deal is in our best interest or makes us safer.

The polling also revealed half of Australians think the US is less democratic under Trump, and half would feel unsafe travelling there.

“Australians are deeply concerned about what is happening in the United States today – so concerned, in fact, that half of us would feel unsafe travelling there,” said Dr Emma Shortis, Director of the International & Security Affairs Program at The Australia Institute.

“Australians are often told that we “share values” with the United States. These numbers suggest that Australians are far from convinced that we share values with Donald Trump’s America.

“Only 16% of Australians believe that the United States is a “very reliable” security ally. Australia has promised to hand over $368 billion dollars in the belief that the United States will come through. The Australian people don’t appear to share that faith.

“The Labor government has failed to adequately explain the AUKUS agreement to the Australian people. 37% of Australians now don’t know or aren’t sure if AUKUS makes Australia safer – an increase of 6% from previous polling in July”.

Just a reminder for everyone to put their franking credits out for Tim Wilson today, as the poor MP has to work even though it is Melbourne Cup day. Wilson had a tongue-in-cheek whinge about the unfairness of it all while at Derby day with half of his colleagues (all in different marques though, because it is not as if they actually like each other) which Patrick Gorman used yesterday to remind everyone how much they don’t like Tim Wilson.

So yes, it’s Melbourne Cup day and Mr Melbourne has to work. He was only able to swan around at Derby Day, which everyone knows is the Aldi Cup day.

Just another reason to always be kind, because you truly don’t know what secret battles someone else is facing.

Hello and welcome back to another day of The Point Live. A very big thank you to Glenn Connley who took you through most of yesterday so I could finish a book project on deadline and save myself from being chained to a desk by my publisher and forced to watch non-stop dixers as punishment.

Speaking of punishment, Sussan Ley is still leader of the Liberal party and the Australian, the AFR and the Liberals who still talk to me were all saying the same thing last night – that she will most likely follow the Nationals and dump net zero to keep her leadership alive for a smidge longer.

But the party room is already starting to sniff in the direction of Angus Taylor. Ley is damned if she does or doesn’t here – if she stands up to the Nationals, it’s over and if she doesn’t stand up to the Nationals, she shows how weak she is, and it’s over. The Nationals have driven the Liberals into the ground and are now shoveling dirt on top, but their act of self-saucing destruction will also spell the end of their own party’s relevancy – they are just yet to see it. It does say everything about the current political climate that Labor is taking it fairly gentle on Ley and focusing their mirth on Barnaby Joyce and the Nationals, as it shows who Labor sees as the actual power. Ley is an after-thought, and a pitied one at that. You could feel some sympathy for her if she had ever stood for anything.

It is party room meeting day, so some of this will come to a head. Labor is going to take a back seat as much as possible and let all of this play out – but let’s all remember that Labor also made the decision to allow Barnaby Joyce’s private members’ bill to scrap net zero be debated in the house – and week, after week at that – which was all designed to create this very situation. They saw this playing out exactly as it has because at this point in time, all these people have sat across from each other for a lot of years now, and know exactly what makes them tick.

When they are writing the epitaph for the Coalition, tell Howard it was me (Albanese, probably)

We will be keeping an eye on that shit fight as well as debunking most of the ridiculous things they will no doubt say, so I hope you’ll stick around. I’ll be with you throughout the day, and you’ll have the lens and contacts of Mike Bowers as well, because he’s just lovely like that.

It is going to be a four coffee day. At least. Thanks for sharing your coffee routines with us yesterday – the next priority with the blog is to set up a more traditional comments system so everyone can have a chat under the blog, so thank you for sowing the seeds of that community now. We are loving hearing from all of you and hope to set things up so you can have a chat with each other, soon.

It is going to be a messy day, so make sure you bring your protective clothing. No one likes splashback.

Ready? Let’s get into it.