![Malcolm Turnbull has something to work with politically.](http://web.archive.org./web/20170907105847/http://www.afr.com/content/dam/images/g/y/c/o/i/q/image.related.afrArticleLead.620x350.gycn3z.png/1504776952970.jpg)
![](http://web.archive.org./web/20170907105847im_/http://www.afr.com/content/dam/images/g/h/c/f/4/z/image.imgtype.afrAuthorAvatar.120x120.png/1432867148068.png)
The assumptions in politics can often be misleading, particularly if they are over-simplified. Here are a few examples: Malcolm Turnbull is rubbish at politics; the Coalition regularly gets creamed on parliamentary tactics by Labor; the Prime Minister is in a world of pain on energy and climate change policy, hemmed in by his conservative wing while Labor has a clear battle plan on energy and climate.
There were reasons to at least test some of these ideas this week.
In the fetid hothouse of Parliament, it was not a good week for Labor, despite all the uncertainty around the question of whether various MPs and senators, including Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, are entitled to sit in Parliament.
Now, frankly, not all that many people care these days outside Parliament House about the tactical battles in question time. But they can be important for the psychology of both sides of politics, and their sense of who is "winning" and "losing".
And as the days went by this week, Labor's strategy of challenging Joyce's legitimacy looked increasingly ineffective. Anthony Albanese's revelation that – with a byelection possibly in prospect – there has suddenly been a frenzy of infrastructure projects in Joyce's seat of New England in recent weeks, worked. But other than that, an unperturbed Turnbull gave succinct rebuffs to Labor's questions, giving more time for government Dorothy Dixers and leaving the opposition looking all tactics, no strategy.
Happily back on energy
And in the debate on energy, the Prime Minister is actually in his happy place, talking dispatchable energy and storage.
Is there a clear way forward yet for him to get his party room to agree to a clean energy target – as recommended by the Finkel Review – that will create some investor certainty to drive new energy investments in the medium to long term? Nope.
Has there been a transformation in the energy debate over the past year to a place that is actually more politically manageable for the Prime Minister? Yep.
The debate about Australia's future energy needs has morphed a long way from one driven purely by climate change. Certainty of supply – following last year's South Australian blackouts – and dealing with soaring energy prices are now the issues that focus voters' minds.
These issues are of course directly tied up with what happens to the clean energy target and getting a proper – and crucially bipartisan – investment regime in place.
AEMO clears the way
But voters now want to see some "doing words" from politicians about energy prices, and while the medium to long term remains problematic, Turnbull now has lots of short term doing words which involve tangible things that most voters can understand.
By commissioning the report from the Australian Energy Market Operator on "dispatchable capability" that was released this week, the government has been able to focus the debate on the immediate issue of a 1000-megawatt shortfall in the system over the next five years in a way that both separates it from the clean energy target, and takes it beyond a political choice between "renewables versus coal" made by governments alone.
AEMO's advice this week could not have been clearer:
"AEMO has also concluded that given the short time available to bring new resources online, the value of avoiding unnecessary investment in new power plants with uncertain long-term business viability, and the value of maintaining fuel diversity to manage price risk, consideration should also be given to the possible extension of the capability of some existing resources to support the energy transition now under way".
"This could take the form of life-extension or investment to increase the flexibility of current dispatchable resources, and thereby improving their business viability and extending their life in the market."
In other words, it is hard to look past the choice of extending the life of legacy, coal-fired plant over the next few years, even if you put the odd diesel generator or fast start gas generator into the mix as part of a strategic reserve.
Labor's struggles with coal
Labor's squirming this week when asked whether it agreed with extending the life of the Liddell power station in NSW has been striking. Until Thursday, there was quite a lot of "oh look over there" in answer to questions about whether it agreed with extending the life of Liddell. The opposition, of course, has been presenting itself as champion of renewables and relentlessly attacked any proposals for future coal-fired power stations. But its position is complicated because at least three of its MPs are in "coal" seats in the Hunter Valley and Liddell is in a Labor electorate.
On Thursday, Bill Shorten went on ABC's AM to say he thought the government should work with Labor on getting a strategic reserve into place (that is, accepting the AEMO recommendations which must include extending the life of Liddell).
Just what is in play at Liddell is still unclear. Delta Energy has expressed an interest in buying it. AGL doesn't seem completely persuaded about selling. There is certainly more going on behind the scenes here than we know about. The NSW government seems to be a lot more involved than has been made public for starters.
But whatever happens here, the future of the so-called "legacy" power stations will require continuing decisions from Canberra. The bidding process for Victoria's Loy Yang B power station has been extended to the middle of this month.
The fight for Liddell
The two frontrunners are Delta and Alinta Energy. Alinta is owned by the Hong Kong based Chow Tai Fook Enterprises, meaning a takeover could require Treasurer Scott Morrison to give the deal foreign investment approval.
It was Alinta that closed the Northern power station in South Australia – which helped create the vulnerabilities in the South Australian network – and you can bet that Delta will make much of Alinta's history of closing plants, while it is demonstrating its commitment to keep them open.
It also brings the question of ownership of strategic assets back into play, though with a new twist of being linked to energy security as much as national security.
Overall though, a debate which is nothing short of feral in the wake of last year's South Australian blackouts, is gradually being wrangled into a more manageable shape for the government. Both sides of politics continue to blame each other for the mess. Voters with hardline positions on coal and renewables will have not had any reason to change their views.
But the Prime Minister has something to work with politically, and more importantly, some policy options that let him talk coal now, but plan for renewables in coming years.
Laura Tingle is The Australian Financial Review's political editor