If, when I was in politics, I were confronted with an issue where some 50 per cent of voters thought something should be done about it, I would have jumped to address it.

So, when some 70-80 per cent of voters consistently say in various polls and surveys that they expect a substantive, government-led response to the climate challenge, and a significant shift to renewable energy, you'd think government would hear them and respond accordingly.

No, not the Morrison government! This is not only anti-democratic but ignorant and irresponsible in respect of both the current and future generations of Australians. Moreover, it will probably cost them government at the coming May election.

Morrison, himself, created an indelible image by carrying a lump of coal into the Parliament to sing its virtues. He is still creating an expectation that his government, if returned, may finance a new coal-fired power station, even though some 80 domestic and foreign banks have now said that they wouldn't finance it, the big insurers, such as AXA, have announced that they wouldn't insure it, and renewable power is now much cheaper.

It should also have been instructive for Morrison to recognise that the swing against his party in the recent Victorian state election, and his loss of the blue ribbon seat of Wentworth with nearly a 20 per cent swing in the recent by-election, were significantly due to the party's status as a "laggard" on the climate issue.

He should also note that, for the first time, the NSW government differentiated itself from the Morrison government position on climate in the recent state election which saw Berejiklian returned with a historic victory, to govern for a third term, and with a parliamentary majority.

It is also inexplicable how Morrison and most of his Liberal colleagues so easily let the National Party dictate many of the shots on climate and coal, as evidence mounts of what is almost their "toxicity" with regional Australia. The Nats also clearly don't listen to their voter base. Farmers (including the NFF) are calling for improved carbon storage in their soils as they recognise how it works to improve soil resilience and reduce the severity of droughts, not to mention that they stand to earn valuable carbon credits that would significantly improve their commercial viability.

Similarly major miners are recognising the inevitability of action on climate change, with Glencore committing to limit their future coal production, and BHP even calling for the government "to put a price on carbon".

More broadly, the finance community, including regulatory authorities such as the Reserve Bank and APRA, has begun to focus significantly on climate risks and the risk of a global, climate-induced financial crisis.

You can only be struck and dismayed by the fact that our government still seeks to debate what is an urgent and essential transition to a low carbon economy and society when, say in the UK and Europe, the focus is on how to best manage that transition, and how it can be expedited.

Smart governments see the necessity and inevitability of such a transition and seek to facilitate it rather than resist and delay it.

Over the last couple of decades LNP governments have mounted all sorts of arguments to avoid or delay climate action. The two most "popular" have been that "we should wait until the big polluters, especially China and India, start to rein in their emissions", and "climate inaction is an important differentiator from Labor".

Well China and India are now well advanced in their essential transitions, indeed well ahead of us. Labor has also moved much more decisively, at both state and federal levels, to delineate a Climate Action Plan.

Indeed, the Shorten Labor opposition has now moved well in front of the LNP and built considerable credibility with voters, by essentially leading the climate debate, and in delineating a deliverable pathway to not only meeting our Paris emissions reduction commitments, but beyond.

While the Labor response is still inadequate, especially lacking a whole-of-economy strategy, including transport and other industries rather than just electricity, it has probably done enough to underwrite them winning government in May.

John Hewson is a professor at the Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, and a former Liberal opposition leader.