Yes, the crisis had come upon us unexpectedly. Australians were being asked to do things we had not had to do for a century, and the final outcome was unknown. But the only way the nation could make it through to the "other side" was if nobody was left behind.

It was, as the PM is also wont to say, a "team Australia moment".

To the surprise of many, including possibly him, this simple rhetoric struck a chord. The nation rallied and, as a result, Australia has had less death, suffering and economic distress than almost any other country.

So why, in light of this, does this same leader routinely adopt such a markedly different approach to anthropogenic climate change, the existential global threat that eclipses even the pandemic?

While much of what the PM said at the Business Council dinner on Monday night was good to hear, indicating a growing commitment to zero net emissions by 2050, it was his unprovoked assault on inner-city latte sippers, wine quaffers, and dinner-party regulars that hit the headlines.

This was an unnecessary, unhelpful, and ultimately highly distracting attempt to dog-whistle the climate change deniers on his backbench and in the Nationals, by driving in the wedge at a time when national unity on this issue has never been more important.

It also diverted attention from the PM's reference to his imminent participation in this week's climate summit with President Biden and his reiteration of his desire to "get to that net-zero economy, as I said, as quickly as possible and preferably by 2050".

Given there is now a strong national consensus for action on emissions reduction, it is hard to see how such divisive, indeed almost childish, tactics can benefit the government at the polling booth.

Most Australians, including many in the rural and regional constituencies which seem to be of such concern to Mr Morrison, are well ahead of the average conservative MP on this issue.

Monday night's speech featured the confusing spectacle of a PM praising the ambitious efforts of agribusiness and the mining industry in reducing emissions on the one hand while, on the other, implying they are the ones who would be damaged by policies intended to encourage them to continue the great work they have already begun.

Who is Mr Morrison talking to? Is it really the hard-nosed business people, who know that if they don't reduce emissions they will soon be paying a penalty when they try to export to European and American markets? Or is it that small handful of ultra-conservative diehards sitting behind him on the backbenches, whose votes he needs so badly?

While Anthony Albanese was in agreement with the LNP on the importance of industry initiatives to reduce emissions in his speech on clean energy on Tuesday, he made it clear that if elected he would be doing far more than just relying on technological progress to get Australia across the line.

While the ALP is still refusing to set a 2030 emissions reduction target, it has committed to a $20 billion investment in the energy grid, a $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund and significant incentives to buy electric cars if it wins the next election.

The Prime Minister will never be able to achieve anything beyond tokenism until he is prepared to stare down the climate recalcitrants in his party. The example of COVID-19 demonstrates the public is ready to follow strong leadership on the issue.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: