Carbon

Carbon farming: The side of net zero running out of friends

Eric Barker 10/06/2026

LOOKING at One Nation’s continually soaring popularity in the polls, it is fair to say scrapping Australia’s target to reach net zero emissions by 2050 is a popular plan.

While the Coalition joins in the promises to scrap the target, it is also looking to walk away from another policy it has largely supported over the past two decades – the carbon market.

Both parties have vowed to scrap the “safeguard mechanism” which forces big emitting companies to purchase carbon credits if they exceed a certain limit of emissions. Without a policy like the safeguard mechanism, it hard to see the carbon market survive.

The Coalition’s move away from the carbon market is significant for the carbon industry, which has struggled to find friends across the political spectrum for its entire existence.

Labor claims to support the carbon market and has geared the safeguard mechanism in a way that many are tipping to send the demand for Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCU) through the roof.

But it has also tied the industry up in regulation, cancelled its main ACCU producing methodology, cancelled a key methodology for the beef industry and held the soil carbon methodology up in a review for more than a year.

Many in the carbon industry believe Labor and its climate change department are scared of criticism from the anti-fossil fuel lobby, which has cast the carbon market as a way of producers profiteering and big companies paying their way out of real action.

Lobby groups like The Australia Institute and the Australian Conservation Foundation have been critical of offsets for similar reasons. And in parliament, groups the Greens and Senator David Pocock have been critical of Labor’s approach to the carbon market, calling for limits on carbon credits when legislating the safeguard mechanism and tighter controls on carbon projects.

A bit about the carbon market

Australia’s carbon market started with the Abbott Government in 2013, with the creation of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) which was a replacement of the Gillard Government’s carbon tax.

The ERF was set up to facilitate carbon projects and was the sole buyer of ACCUs at the time. In 2016, the Turnbull Government established the safeguard mechanism, putting an emissions limit on companies like mines and making them purchase ACCUs whenever they exceeded those limits.

When the Albanese Labor Government came into power in 2022, they ramped up the safeguard mechanism – making the limits decline over the years to 2035.

What are One Nation and the Coalition saying?

Beef Central contacted both One Nation and Nationals leader Matt Canavan to ask if there was a plan to continue the carbon market if they scrap the safeguard mechanism. Mr Canavan has not come back, but a spokesperson from One Nation said it had no plan to continue the carbon market.

“One Nation would absolutely scrap the safeguard mechanism, carbon market and all net-zero and emissions reductions policies,” the spokesperson said.

“Net-Zero is asking, and will in the future force, farmers to lock up their productive agricultural land. Net-zero is also increasing the cost of fertiliser and energy inputs into farming. Farmers are increasingly resorting to revenue from alternative sources like carbon markets because successive governments have made agriculture un-economic thanks to the pursuit of industry-killing net-zero policies.

“One Nation believes prime agricultural land is for growing food and fibre, not for locking up to meet agreements made in Paris.”

Liberal leader Angus Taylor said in his budget reply speech the safeguard mechanism was a default carbon tax.

“This tax jacks up the price on essential building materials like steel, cement, and glass – driving up the cost of new homes. It also undermines investment in key industries and hastens them going offshore,” Mr Taylor said.

“Indeed, we will abolish Labor’s crippling net zero carbon taxes wherever we find them.  On mining, manufacturing, electricity, vehicles, and imports.”

Campaign starts to save the carbon market

With hundreds of farmers having signed up to carbon projects over the past two decades, a campaign has started to rescue the carbon market.

The Growing Australia’s Nature Economy (GANE) campaign was launched earlier this year. It says the carbon market has paid out close to $800m to farmers, landholders and Indigenous communities.

GANE has been particularly critical of One Nation and the Coalition saying some of the loudest critics of the carbon market are from the electorates that have benefited from carbon the most.

It has been posting videos and press releases from farmers involved in the market explaining how they have benefited from carbon.

HAVE YOUR SAY

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your comment will not appear until it has been moderated.
Contributions that contravene our Comments Policy will not be published.

Comments

  1. David Dwyer

    The Safeguard Mechanism is fundamentally a government intervention designed to create a market and economic incentives that would not otherwise exist, with the intention of driving behavioral and technological change.

    It’s also worth noting that the IPCC itself acknowledges significant uncertainty ranges and varying confidence levels in many climate projections and impact assessments. The science should always be read in its entirety, including the discussion around assumptions, uncertainties and confidence intervals, rather than focusing solely on headline conclusions.

    The tide is changing, and one thing I have learned is that you cannot hold back the tide.

    As a broader principle, whenever governments rely on direct market intervention to influence behaviour, rather than creating conditions for industry-led innovation and adoption, there is a risk of increased complexity, unintended consequences, compliance costs, market distortions, and the creation of both winners and losers. Whether the benefits outweigh those costs is ultimately a matter for debate. Unfortunately, much of this debate has, at times, lacked balance, with alternative viewpoints often receiving less attention than prevailing policy positions. Robust public policy is best served when competing ideas and evidence can be openly examined and challenged.

  2. Susan L Clarke

    I agree, the Carbon Market needs tidying up.
    However the ignorant push by the Coalition and PHON
    Is misleading.
    Farming will be forced to face rising Temperstures and changed rainfall patterns
    The next few generations will pay a heavy price for the Fossil Fuel Lobby groups and the wilfully ignorant politicians we are observing
    Very depressing
    We never seem to learn until too late

Get Beef Central's news headlines emailed to you -
FREE!