The Australian government is facing increasing pressure to regulate public relations firms and the fossil fuel industry over concerns of widespread climate misinformation. A Senate inquiry is currently scrutinizing the role of PR and advertising agencies in campaigns that critics say are designed to mislead the public and delay climate action. The inquiry has heard testimony from climate scientists, researchers, and communication professionals who argue that these campaigns distort public perception and undermine support for renewable energy solutions.
This move towards potential regulation comes amid a global push for greater accountability in corporate communications about climate change. The inquiry is examining the prevalence and impact of misinformation, with a focus on “greenwashing”—the practice of making misleading claims about environmental credentials. Submissions to the inquiry have highlighted numerous instances of alleged misinformation, from claims about the cleanliness of natural gas to the economic costs of transitioning to renewable energy. The committee is expected to deliver its final report by February 4, 2026, which could recommend significant changes to how fossil fuel companies and their communication partners are allowed to operate in Australia.
Senate Inquiry on Climate Information Integrity
A Senate Select Committee on Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy was established in July 2025 to investigate the impact of climate-related misinformation. The inquiry, initiated by the Australian Greens, is chaired by Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, who has stated that “aggressive and coordinated disinformation campaigns are increasingly spreading false information designed to deliberately mislead and influence public opinion on climate change.” The committee’s terms of reference include examining the sources of misinformation, the role of PR and media organizations, and the effectiveness of current regulations.
Key Submissions and Testimonies
The inquiry has received a large volume of submissions from various organizations and individuals. Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD), a coalition of over 50 organizations, submitted a report detailing the prevalence of greenwashing and its negative impact on public perception of climate solutions. Their research indicates that a significant portion of the Australian public believes misinformation about renewable energy and electric vehicles. For instance, one survey found that 37% of Australians believe renewable energy is more expensive than fossil fuels, a claim that is often disputed by energy experts.
Comms Declare, a not-for-profit representing communications professionals who have pledged not to promote fossil fuels, also provided a detailed submission. The organization argues for widening the definition of “serious harm” in the proposed Communications Legislation Amendment to include environmental and climate damage. They have also called for more transparency in online political advertising and for algorithms that spread misinformation to be disclosed and remedied.
Allegations of Misinformation and Greenwashing
Submissions to the inquiry have pointed to several examples of alleged misinformation campaigns. One prominent case involves “Australians for Natural Gas,” a group that presents itself as a grassroots organization but was reportedly established with the help of a PR firm and the chief executive of a gas company. Critics argue that the group’s campaigns, which promote natural gas as a necessary part of Australia’s energy mix, downplay the environmental impact of methane emissions and the viability of renewable alternatives.
Another area of concern is “greenwashing,” where companies make misleading claims about their environmental performance. The Climate Council has accused major fossil fuel corporations in Australia of being “expert greenwashers,” using terms like “net zero” and “carbon neutral” to create a false impression of climate action while continuing to expand their fossil fuel operations. These campaigns often focus on a company’s relatively small investments in renewable energy while ignoring the much larger impact of their core business.
The Role of “Astroturfing”
“Astroturfing,” the practice of creating fake grassroots campaigns, has been identified as a key tactic used to spread climate misinformation. These campaigns are designed to create the illusion of widespread public support for a particular policy or position, thereby influencing policymakers and public opinion. The inquiry has heard that such strategies have been used in Australia to oppose renewable energy projects and to promote the continued use of fossil fuels.
Proposals for Regulation
A range of regulatory solutions has been proposed to the Senate committee. Comms Declare has advocated for a ban on fossil fuel advertising, similar to the restrictions placed on tobacco products. They argue that such a ban would help to reduce the “social license” of fossil fuel companies and limit their ability to spread misinformation. Others have called for stricter enforcement of existing consumer protection laws and for new legislation specifically targeting greenwashing.
The Australian Human Rights Commission, in its submission, has called for a rights-based approach to any new regulations, emphasizing the need to balance the harms of misinformation with the protection of freedom of expression. The commission has also highlighted the importance of a multi-faceted policy response that includes media literacy campaigns and support for independent journalism.
Industry Response and Counterarguments
The fossil fuel industry and its supporters have pushed back against the allegations of misinformation. The Australian Gas Infrastructure Group (AGIG), for example, has defended its advertising campaigns, stating that they are not misleading and that the company is committed to a renewable gas future. In response to a ruling by the advertising regulator that one of its social media posts was misleading, AGIG stood by the accuracy of its information but agreed to remove the post. The company has also disputed claims about the health risks of gas cooktops in Australia, arguing that studies from other countries are not applicable.
Some groups have also criticized the Senate inquiry itself, with the right-wing activist group Advance sending thousands of emails to senators, labeling the inquiry a “political tactic to silence dissent.” The group, which opposes net-zero emissions targets, has been accused of being part of the “denial machine” working to delay climate action.
The Debate Over Free Speech
A key counterargument to the proposed regulations is the potential impact on free speech. Critics of regulation argue that it could be used to stifle legitimate debate and to censor unpopular opinions. The Australian Human Rights Commission has acknowledged these concerns, stating that any new laws must not “improperly restrict access to diverse perspectives or censor different views.” This tension between combating misinformation and protecting free speech is a central challenge for the Senate committee as it considers its recommendations.