Despite repeated promises to the contrary, it is now becoming clear that the Abbott government has no intention of taking meaningful action on climate change.

The Coalition’s so-called Direct Action policy has always been a farce and a policy fig leaf to cover Tony Abbott’s belief that climate change science is, as he once described it, “crap” – a view shared by the hand-picked chair of his new Business Advisory Council, Maurice Newman, who recently declared that “anthropological” (as he described it) climate change was a “myth”.

No sooner had it taken office than the Abbott government, having apparently cast aside its Direct Action policy charade in favour of the diversion of a new white paper, set about wrecking the achievements and successes of the previous government in addressing Australia’s emissions.

The most graphic illustration of Abbott’s ideological warfare against action on climate change may not be the axing of the Climate Commission, but his attempt to shut down theClean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC).

The CEFC forms part of the suite of measures set up by the previous government to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions by grasping the huge economic opportunities offered by the burgeoning clean energy sector.

With an eminent board and high-performing staff headed by former Macquarie Bank executive Oliver Yates, the CEFC possesses considerable financial nous and business experience, ranging across investments, portfolio management, finance, corporate treasury, legal, human resources, marketing and communications, risk management, governance, corporate affairs and government.

The market was quick to respond to it. In just its first two months of operation – since 1 July this year – the CEFC has been able to attract investment in new, clean energy projects worth $1.6bn, raising around $2.90 in private sector investment for every $1 of taxpayer funds invested. Thus far, the CEFC has committed investments of around $500m, with total project value of around $2bn.

The CEFC has been in active discussions with some 50 project proponents, and more than 100 others have expressed interest in CEFC finance. Projects include waste-to-energy plants, wind farms, bio-energy generation ventures, solar farms and low-energy street lighting investments for councils. If the CEFC is allowed to continue its work, these projects will be worth many billions of dollars to the Australian economy, and will create thousands of jobs.

And all this investment is occurring at minimal cost to taxpayers. The CEFC has no adverse impact on government net debt and its contracted investments are expected to earn an average return of around 7%, which is 4% above the government’s cost of funds.

Coalition claims that the CEFC is some kind of “green slush fund” suggest either a catastrophic lack of financial acumen, or a catastrophic lack of honesty. The CEFC will have a positive net contribution to the nation’s finances as a fund that invests money in clean energy projects for a positive return.

It is clear that Abbott’s primary concern about the CEFC is not that it has been unsuccessful in stimulating new business opportunities and jobs in the clean energy sector. Rather, it seems his concern may be that the CEFC has succeeded admirably. This success is anathema to a government that won office by disparaging the effectiveness of the government that it was seeking to replace.

In stark contrast to the CEFC’s role as an investment vehicle to stimulate the clean energy industry in Australia, it is the Coalition’s Direct Action policy that proposes a slush-fund of taxpayers' money to be doled out without return – and not to new clean technology businesses, but rather, to existing big polluters.

Abbott now seems determined to ensure that good policies implemented over the past six years by Labor are torn down as fast as possible, regardless of their economic merit, regardless of the negative impact this might have on the jobs and businesses that have been created, and regardless of whether this tearing down is done in an appropriate legal manner – or not.

On this last point, it appears that Abbott has been in such a desperate rush to destroy the CEFC that he has sought to bypass the legal processes required to dismantle an independent statutory body. Independent statutory bodies such as the CEFC are created by legislation, and legislation is needed to dissolve them. Treasurer Joe Hockey has sought to get around the troublesome requirements of Australia’s laws and democratic processes by asking the Board of the CEFC to suspend its operations, placing the Board in the invidious position of potentially breaching its legal and contractual obligations.

The CEFC has already shown itself to be a financially sound and economically effective instrument for action on climate change. As a vehicle for jobs creation, innovation and new, clean energy industries, it ticks all the boxes. At the very least, the new government should recognise that the CEFC’s existence is not incompatible with its own claimed policy priorities under Direct Action.

If it persists with its ham-fisted attempts to shut down the CEFC, it will be clear not just that the government regards climate change as a myth, but that it is prepared to attack sound job creation and economic investment to pursue its blinkered ideological opposition to effective action on climate change.