No replacement plan
Opponents said the bill would repeal institutions and targets without offering an alternative plan for emissions, energy investment or regional transition.
Repeal Net Zero
Current status
This bill is currently before Parliament.
Policy area
Climate, energy & environment
What does this bill do?
Repeals the Climate Change Act 2022The Commonwealth law that put Australia’s emissions-reduction targets into legislation. This bill would repeal it., the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it. Act 2024, the New Vehicle Efficiency StandardA national standard for new vehicle emissions. This bill would repeal the 2024 Act that created it. Act 2024 and two 2024 laws for the Future Made in AustraliaA Commonwealth industry policy framework. This bill would remove its net-zero transformation stream and related references. Guarantee of Origin schemeA certification scheme for tracking low-emissions products and energy attributes. This bill would repeal the 2024 laws for the Future Made in Australia Guarantee of Origin scheme..
Why was it introduced?
Barnaby Joyce introduced the bill as a private member’s bill to dismantle Commonwealth laws that support Australia’s net-zero emissions policy. The explanatory memorandum argues that those laws increase living costs, weaken industry and manufacturing, divide regional communities and put pressure on the federal budget. Supporters in the debate framed the bill as a way to force Parliament to reconsider the cost of net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero.; opponents framed it as an attempt to abandon Australia’s climate and clean-energy framework without a replacement.
Broader context
The bill sits inside Australia’s long-running argument over how to meet emissions targets while keeping energy affordable and regional industries viable. It responds directly to laws passed since 2022 that embedded net-zero targets, clean-energy industry programs, the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it., vehicle efficiency standards and the Safeguard MechanismRules under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act that apply emissions baselines to large industrial facilities. This bill would remove those rules.. The debate later became tied to the Coalition’s 2025 internal decision to move away from its previous net-zero position.
Key criticism
Critics argued that the bill would remove Australia’s emissions-reduction framework without replacing it. The main concerns were that it would close transition institutions, unsettle investment, weaken climate action and leave regional communities with less support to manage economic change.
Who supported it?
Barnaby Joyce MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from LNP, Nationals, Liberal Party.
Introduced in House 28 July 2025
Debate underway in House 24 Nov 2025
Not yet reached Senate —
Not yet law —
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
317 days
Updated 10 June 2026.
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Repeals the Climate Change Act 2022The Commonwealth law that put Australia’s emissions-reduction targets into legislation. This bill would repeal it., the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it. Act 2024, the New Vehicle Efficiency StandardA national standard for new vehicle emissions. This bill would repeal the 2024 Act that created it. Act 2024 and two 2024 laws for the Future Made in AustraliaA Commonwealth industry policy framework. This bill would remove its net-zero transformation stream and related references. Guarantee of Origin schemeA certification scheme for tracking low-emissions products and energy attributes. This bill would repeal the 2024 laws for the Future Made in Australia Guarantee of Origin scheme..
-
Removes net-zero, Paris AgreementThe international climate agreement under which countries set and update emissions-reduction commitments. This bill would remove several Commonwealth-law references to it. and emissions-reduction-target references from Export Finance Australia laws, including the agency’s net-zero function.
-
Narrows the Future Made in AustraliaA Commonwealth industry policy framework. This bill would remove its net-zero transformation stream and related references. Act 2024 so its National Interest Framework would keep only the economic resilience and security stream, rather than also including a net-zero transformation stream.
-
Removes the Safeguard MechanismRules under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act that apply emissions baselines to large industrial facilities. This bill would remove those rules. from the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007The Commonwealth reporting law for greenhouse gas and energy information. The bill would amend it to remove the Safeguard Mechanism. by repealing definitions and provisions tied to safeguard emissions, credits, audits, outcomes and rules.
-
If passed, the whole Act would start the day after Royal Assent. At collection time the bill was still before the House of Representatives, with no recorded divisions or amendment outcomes.
Show source excerpts
-
Part 1—Repeals Climate Change Act 2022 1 The whole of the Act Repeal the Act. Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin) Act 2024 2 The whole of the Act Repeal the Act. Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin Charges) Act 2024 3 The whole of the Act Repeal the Act. Net Zero Economy Authority Act 2024 4 The whole of the Act Repeal the Act. New Vehicle Efficiency Standard Act 2024 5 The whole of the Act Repeal the Act.
Repeal Net Zero introduced bill text -
Items 6 to 13 of Schedule 1 remove references to net zero from the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Act 1991.
Repeal Net Zero explanatory memorandum -
21 Subsections 7(2) and (3) Repeal the subsections, substitute: (2) The National Interest Framework consists of the economic resilience and security stream.
Repeal Net Zero introduced bill text -
Items 27 to 51 of Schedule 1 have the effect of removing the Safeguard Mechanism by making the necessary amendments to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007.
Repeal Net Zero explanatory memorandum -
1. The whole of this Act The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent.
Repeal Net Zero introduced bill text
Context
Broader context for this bill
The bill sits inside Australia’s long-running argument over how to meet emissions targets while keeping energy affordable and regional industries viable. It responds directly to laws passed since 2022 that embedded net-zero targets, clean-energy industry programs, the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it., vehicle efficiency standards and the Safeguard MechanismRules under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act that apply emissions baselines to large industrial facilities. This bill would remove those rules.. The debate later became tied to the Coalition’s 2025 internal decision to move away from its previous net-zero position.
- 2021
Coalition government backs net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. by 2050
Public reporting collected for this bill says the Morrison government adopted a 2050 net-zero emissions position in 2021, setting the baseline policy that later Coalition figures argued over.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 2022
Climate Change Act becomes a repeal target
The bill would repeal the Climate Change Act 2022The Commonwealth law that put Australia’s emissions-reduction targets into legislation. This bill would repeal it., which the introduced bill lists as the first Act to be repealed.
Introduced bill text ↗ - 2024
New net-zero institutions are added
The bill also targets 2024 laws covering the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it., the New Vehicle Efficiency StandardA national standard for new vehicle emissions. This bill would repeal the 2024 Act that created it. and the Future Made in AustraliaA Commonwealth industry policy framework. This bill would remove its net-zero transformation stream and related references. Guarantee of Origin schemeA certification scheme for tracking low-emissions products and energy attributes. This bill would repeal the 2024 laws for the Future Made in Australia Guarantee of Origin scheme..
Introduced bill text ↗ - 28 July 2025
Repeal bill introduced in the House
Barnaby Joyce introduced the Repeal Net ZeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. Bill 2025 in the House of Representatives and moved the second reading on the same day.
Parliament of Australia ↗ - 18 Sept 2025
Government announces 2035 climate target range
While the repeal bill was before Parliament, the government announced a proposed 62 to 70 per cent emissions cut by 2035, sharpening the contrast between the bill and government policy.
Australian Financial Review ↗ - 16 Nov 2025
Coalition settles new energy-policy position
AFR reporting said the Liberal and National parties struck an agreement on a new energy policy after dumping net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero., turning the bill’s argument into a wider opposition-policy fight.
Australian Financial Review ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 28 July 2025
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 28 July 2025
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Second reading debate 25 Aug 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 01 Sept 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 27 Oct 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 03 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Second reading debate 24 Nov 2025
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
Critics argued that the bill would remove Australia’s emissions-reduction framework without replacing it. The main concerns were that it would close transition institutions, unsettle investment, weaken climate action and leave regional communities with less support to manage economic change.
Supporters argued the existing net-zero framework was too costly and damaging; critics argued repeal would create more economic and climate risk than it solved.
Investment uncertainty
Opponents said even proposing repeal would make Australia look unreliable to businesses and investors considering clean-energy and future-industry projects.
Climate and regional risk
Labor and independent speakers argued that abandoning net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. would worsen climate risks for communities already exposed to fires, floods, drought and economic transition.
Loss of transition supports
Critics highlighted that the bill would abolish the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it. and repeal vehicle efficiency standards, which they said support workers, regions and lower fuel costs.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes have been found yet for this bill.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Barnaby Joyce
Barnaby Joyce supports the bill and argues that Australia’s net-zero policy raises power prices, weakens manufacturing and divides regional communities while having no meaningful effect on the global climate.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
Kate Chaney
Kate Chaney opposes the bill, arguing that repealing net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. would damage investor confidence, economic opportunity and Australia’s response to climate risk.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Opposes
Helen Haines
Helen Haines opposes the bill, arguing it would unwind emissions laws, close the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it. and remove vehicle standards without a positive replacement plan for regional communities.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead voice Supports
Matthew Canavan
Matthew Canavan supports the bill and argues in the Senate that net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. has raised energy prices, weakened manufacturing and left Australia poorer while other countries keep using coal.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
10 speakers · 10 oppose
Labor
10 speakers · 10 oppose
-
Alison Byrnes Alison Byrnes opposes the bill and uses Illawarra examples to argue that net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. supports clean-energy manufacturing, skills, batteries and local jobs.
“I am very pleased to speak on the motion in relation to the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025 today to help show this for the farce that we all know it is. While the coalition continues to quibble about whether we should or should not have a net zero target, industry and our community are forging ahead with making net zero a reality.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Dan Repacholi Dan Repacholi opposes the bill and argues that net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. does not mean shutting down coal or industry, but using offsets, technology, solar, batteries and new investment alongside existing strengths.
“Net zero does not mean shutting down industries. Net zero does not mean zero emissions. Net zero is about one thing: offsets. It means we take as much carbon out of the atmosphere as we put in. It is simple and practical, and industries in the Hunter are already doing it.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Louise Miller-Frost Louise Miller-Frost opposes the bill and says the Coalition’s move away from net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. leaves no credible plan for climate change, replacement energy generation or electricity costs.
“While this refers to their lack of energy plan, there is also a complete lack of plan to deal with climate change. The irony is that the coalition seats are largely based in rural and regional areas—some of the areas most at risk from the impacts of climate change.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Emma Comer Emma Comer opposes the bill and says it shows the Coalition adopting Barnaby Joyce’s repeal agenda despite evidence, in her view, that renewable investment is lowering emissions and supporting the energy system.
“The party that introduced net zero targets when last in government have now dumped them—but then stated they support the Paris Agreement—and the former cancels out the latter; it simply doesn't make sense.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Fiona Phillips Fiona Phillips opposes the bill and says communities in Gilmore have already experienced fires, floods and storm damage that show why climate action is needed.
“Climate change has had an absolutely devastating impact on my electorate of Gilmore. Lives were lost and hundreds lost their homes, businesses and livestock when the horrific Black Summer bushfires decimated the New South Wales South Coast in 2019-20.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Susan Templeman Susan Templeman opposes the bill, saying it would abandon climate action despite community experience of fires, floods and storms and despite growth in renewable energy and household batteries.
“People in my community know we cannot pretend she'll be right, mate—not after fires like in 2019-20 that ravaged the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area for three months, took homes and destroyed nearly a million hectares while the eastern seaboard burned like never before and not after the increasingly frequent floods and storms, the wilder weather, that climate scientists in the 20th century predicted in this, the 21st century. Climate change is real, and reducing emissions is an imperative we owe our children and their grandchildren.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kara Cook Kara Cook opposes the bill and says household solar, batteries and clean-energy investment show Australians are already choosing climate action that can cut costs.
“Net zero is not some woke slogan. It's not a culture-war battleground. It's about our suburbs and regions. It's about topping our roofs with solar panels. It's about ordinary Australians making smart choices to cut costs, lower emissions and create a better future for their kids.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Sharon Claydon Sharon Claydon opposes the bill, saying it would revive climate-policy conflict and undermine clean-energy investment and jobs in places such as Newcastle.
“This motion is nothing more than climate denialism. It is reckless. It is dangerous. It betrays the very Australians who want their kids and their grandkids to inherit a safe, livable planet. People in my electorate of Newcastle and, indeed, right across the country know the cost of inaction.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ali France Ali France opposes the bill, arguing that voters backed Labor’s renewable-energy plan and that emissions targets are important for jobs, trade and household savings.
“By endorsing Labor's plan in May, Aussies have made a very clear statement to the world that Australia is the place to do business if you're looking to use clean energy to create prosperity. That is why this bill, the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025, is so bizarre. It goes against the will of the people and it is antibusiness. Responsible emissions targets are essential to Australian jobs.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tom French Tom French opposes the bill, saying it tears down climate institutions without building an alternative and would leave regional Australia weaker.
“The bill before us, the so-called Repeal Net Zero Bill, is the product of that drift. It tears down; it doesn't build. It looks backwards, not forwards. It scraps the Climate Change Act, abolishes the Net Zero Economy Authority and deletes every reference to net zero it can find, as if deleting the words will stop the weather.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
9 speakers · 10 contributions · 9 support
Coalition
9 speakers · 10 contributions · 9 support
-
Garth Hamilton Garth Hamilton supports the bill and argues that net-zero policy pushes technologies such as green hydrogen, offshore wind and carbon capture before they are commercially ready, while blocking nuclear power.
“What we have here is net zero policy trying to force through technology before it is ready and before the market is able to take it up. The bizarre thing, if that weren't bad enough, is that we live in a time where we have a government that is blocking a proven technology at both technology- and commercialisation-readiness levels of nine—well beyond test flight—which is actually out there in the market doing what it does and that would reduce emissions. It's called nuclear.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Barnaby Joyce ★ Barnaby Joyce supports the bill and argues that Australia’s net-zero policy raises power prices, weakens manufacturing and divides regional communities while having no meaningful effect on the global climate.
“I'll start by saying that net zero is going to have absolutely no effect on the climate whatsoever. Why is that the case? Because the vast majority of the globe, in both population and GDP, are not participating in it. China is not participating in it in a real form—neither is India, neither is Indonesia, neither is the United States of America, and neither is most of South-East Asia nor Africa nor the Middle East. So why are we doing this to ourselves? What is the purpose of this?”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Tony Pasin Tony Pasin supports the bill and frames net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. as an expensive policy that raises power bills, hurts manufacturing and weakens national self-reliance.
“This legislation is not about denying climate change; it's about defending the Australian people from a policy that is impoverishing them. It's about sovereignty, affordability and fairness. It's about putting Australians first.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Michael McCormack Michael McCormack supports the bill and says wind, solar and battery projects are damaging prime agricultural land and dividing regional communities.
“The greatest moral challenge for humankind is not the weather, which we cannot change, but the ability to grow food to help feed a hungry world. I note the number of capital city based politicians demanding action on behalf of their virtue-signalling, weather hand-wringers and rent-seeking corporations. Never has the city-country divide, sadly, been greater.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Rick Wilson Rick Wilson supports the bill and says net-zero policies harm mining, agriculture, vehicle users and regional communities in O’Connor.
“I rise today to speak in support of the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025. My electorate of O'Connor is ground zero for net zero. We've already seen the total demise of the nickel industry, with 14 out of 16 nickel mines in my electorate closing thanks to cheap, dirty nickel being produced in Indonesia.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Ben Small Ben Small supports the bill and argues that net-zero policy uses taxes, penalties and subsidies to push households, vehicles and energy markets in directions many Australians do not want.
“When we come to the issue of net zero, it seems that this government decided that it knows better than Australians or, more egregiously, perhaps, that it simply doesn't trust them to do the right thing in their own circumstances.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Llew O'Brien Llew O'Brien supports the bill while saying climate change is real; his argument is that Australia’s current net-zero settings are too costly and are damaging regional communities and industry.
“I rise to speak in support of Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025, brought forward by the member for New England, and I commend him for doing so. At the start, I'll say the obvious: climate change is real. With a global population of over eight billion people, obviously the industries that support them have an effect on climate change, and this is something that we need to manage as a government. But it's how we do that that counts, and I believe that we haven't got those settings right—not even close at the moment.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Colin Boyce 2 contributions Colin Boyce again supports the bill, arguing that the debate is about the economic cost of net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. rather than whether climate change exists.
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Colin Boyce on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Colin Boyce supports the bill and focuses on the cost of net-zero policy for Central Queensland resources, manufacturing, farming land and electricity users.
“I second the motion, and I rise to support this Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025 put forward by my colleague the member for New England, Barnaby Joyce. He is absolutely right. Net zero, ultimately, will destroy our economic base here in Australia. The questions that I want to ask are: What will it cost? What will it cost in manufacturing jobs? What will it cost to the prosperity of ordinary Australians?”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗Second reading speech
Colin Boyce again supports the bill, arguing that the debate is about the economic cost of net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. rather than whether climate change exists.
“by leave—I rise to support the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025, presented by my colleague the member for New England at the last sitting. Unfortunately, this bill has revolved around an argument that if you don't believe in net zero, you don't believe in climate change. I want to put that to bed right now. Climate change is real and is happening right now. Climate change is variable; the earth's geological history tells us that. The earth's climate has been changing ever since the earth began on Thursday afternoon 4.54 billion years ago. So this debate is not about whether you believe in climate change. This is about the economic cost of getting to a position of net zero by 2050.”
Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
2 speakers · 2 oppose
Minor parties and independents
2 speakers · 2 oppose
-
Kate Chaney ★ Kate Chaney opposes the bill, arguing that repealing net zeroA target where greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere are balanced by emissions removed or offset, so the net addition is zero. would damage investor confidence, economic opportunity and Australia’s response to climate risk.
“I rise today to speak against the member for New England's bill to repeal Australia's net zero target. This bill, the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025, is not just a backwards step; it's a reckless rejection of economic opportunities, of environmental responsibility and of political reality.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Helen Haines ★ Helen Haines opposes the bill, arguing it would unwind emissions laws, close the Net Zero Economy AuthorityA Commonwealth body set up to support workers, regions and communities affected by the move to a net-zero economy. This bill would repeal the law establishing it. and remove vehicle standards without a positive replacement plan for regional communities.
“I rise today to oppose the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025. First introduced by the member for New England in his individual capacity, this is now the official stance of the coalition. This bill would unravel Australia's emissions reduction framework without putting anything else in place.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Before Reps -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- Bill type
- Private member’s bill -- The APH page lists the bill type as private and the sponsor as Barnaby Joyce MP.
- 28 July 2025
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 28 July 2025
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 25 Aug 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 01 Sept 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 27 Oct 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 03 Nov 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
- 24 Nov 2025
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.