The Australian opposition leader has confirmed he will ditch Labor’s plan to co-host a global United Nations climate change meeting with the Pacific if he wins the election, labelling the idea “madness”.
Peter Dutton has also claimed that Australian taxpayers would have to pay “tens of billions” to host the event, a figure vastly higher than experts say it would cost.
The Coalition has long been sceptical of Labor’s plan to host a Conference of the Parties global climate meeting with Pacific nations in 2026, and has repeatedly demanded that the ALP explain how much it would cost.
But Dutton went further on Sunday, telling reporters the idea was “madness” while Australians were facing cost-of-living pressures.
“I saw Anthony Albanese catching up with an elderly lady and I hope he told her, she is struggling with the cost-of-living prices under Labor but the government is planning to spend tens of billions of taxpayer dollars on hosting a COP process that will not bring down power prices and will sign a Labor government up to giving tens or hundreds of millions of dollars out to third party countries,” he said.
“It’s madness. It’s not something we are supporting — it is madness.”
While it’s plausible that Australia could provide “tens or hundreds of millions” in climate finance during a COP meeting, analysts have dismissed Dutton’s claim that the event would cost “tens of billions” to host.
While countries have collectively committed billions of dollars in climate finance during COP meetings, Melanie Pill from the Lowy Institute told the ABC the actual cost of hosting was radically lower.
For example, she said it cost Madrid about US$100 million to host COP in 2020, while the cost of COP in Glasgow the next year was about US$250 million, as “significant security measures due to the Covid 19 pandemic … likely bumped up the price tag”.
But she said previous COPs also delivered economic benefits to host countries that shouldn’t be dismissed.
“Hosting a COP can have many economic benefits to the host country, particularly in the local tourism and hospitality sector where hotels, restaurants and small businesses would benefit directly from the people attending the conference,” Dr Pill said.
“It is also not unusual that visitors stay for longer to see a bit of the country where the COP was held.”
The ABC has approached the Coalition to clarify Dutton’s comments.
Clean Energy Investor Group CEO Richie Merzian told the ABC the United Kingdom had assessed that hosting COP in Glasgow in 2021 had actually delivered a “net economic benefit” to the country.
The Trump administration’s exit from the Paris Agreement and plans to expand fossil fuel production has delivered a blow to global ambitions to cut emissions and rein in climate change.
But Merzian said there were still huge opportunities in the energy transition which a COP would help Australia seize.
“Where the world is transitioning to net zero, a target shared by both the government and opposition, Australia can position itself to benefit from building a green economy, powered by renewables, and to showcase it in 2026 at COP31,” he said.
“Australia can become a hub for clean energy investment and manufacturing across the region, and stand up with its Pacific neighbours to address their number one security risk.”
Although the federal government has secured Pacific support for the conference it has not yet won international agreement to actually host the event in 2026 — in large part because Türkiye is also bidding to host, and hasn’t agreed to withdraw.
Merzian said the federal election was now the “biggest barrier” to Australia co-hosting the event with the Pacific, and he was confident Labor would succeed in getting hosting rights if it proceeded.
“The Australian-Pacific bid has majority support amongst international peers and will be secured this year,” he said.
Dr Pill said withdrawing Australia’s bid would be “damaging on many fronts” and “send the completely wrong message to Pacific leaders.”
“COP31 presents an absolute unique opportunity for Australia that should not be missed and could not be more crucial in the current fragile political environment,” she said.
“The U.S is leaving a vacuum in the Pacific and it is in Australia’s interest to counteract China’s growing influence and ascertain Pacific leaders that Australia is a strong and reliable partner.
“A withdrawal would also undermine Australia’s credibility as a country serious about climate change impacts in the Pacific caused by increased sea levels and more extreme weather such as cyclones we have also started to observe in Australia,” Dr Pill said.
