Meanwhile, the release of the Coalition's industrial relations policy on Thursday too - as expected - drew fire from the business community for not going far enough. Facing growing party angst: Tony Abbott. Credit:Dallas Kilponen But the angst about Mr Abbott's alternative to the carbon tax is a new front for the Opposition Leader to combat as he heads towards an election in September that he is strongly favoured to win, according to polls. ''If we are not going to get a big environmental bang for our buck then we ought not to do it,'' said the West Australian MP Dr Washer. ''The policy needs to be reviewed and only the valuable parts need to be retained . . . in light of dire economic circumstances,'' he said.

It is understood others in the Coalition are concerned about the Direct Action plan but will not say so publicly. Mr Abbott has vowed to scrap the carbon tax and reduce pollution and improve the environment through a fund that gives financial incentives to companies that cut carbon emissions. It will cost $3.2 billion over four years. On Friday, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Peter Anderson added his voice to the chorus questioning the wisdom of the Coalition's Direct Action plan. ''We are not prepared to give [Direct Action] a tick at this point,'' Mr Anderson said, adding that he awaited more detail from the Coalition about how it would manage the spending in light of Australia's weakening budget. ''Neither an ETS [emissions trading scheme] nor Direct Action are particularly good approaches in this environment,'' Mr Anderson said. The Coalition should not ''lock in'' its spending on its Direct Action policy until it can ''provide the Australian community with a full picture of what this means for the budget'', he said.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet told National Times Breaking Politics on Friday that Liberal MPs ''know as well as anyone else knows that the Coalition's so-called Direct Action policy won't work''. ''The policy is a joke,'' Mr Combet said. ''It's just a figleaf for Tony Abbott to say he's got a policy.'' A government analysis on Thursday showed that electricity generated by highly polluting coal-fired power plants had fallen 14 per cent since the introduction of the tax, while renewable power had soared. Discontent within the Coalition comes both from those concerned about addressing climate change, such as Dr Washer, and those sceptical about its existence. Another WA MP, Dr Jensen, admitted Direct Action was ''not optimal policy'' but said it was better than Labor's carbon tax or emissions trading scheme. ''I think there's room to manoeuvre after the election on Direct Action,'' said Dr Jensen, a climate sceptic. ''I would welcome debate on all sorts of big spending commitments where the benefits are arguable.''

The MPs were part of a Liberal Party group, led by backbencher Alex Hawke, which this week urged Mr Abbott to ditch his paid parental leave scheme. Last month former treasurer Peter Costello said the Coalition should abandon policies such as paid parental leave and Direct Action because they were unaffordable. Liberal frontbencher Malcolm Turnbull, who lost the leadership over his support for Labor's emissions trading scheme, has previously described the Coalition's climate change policy as a ''farce'' and ''bullshit''. ''It is not possible to criticise the new Coalition policy on climate change because it does not exist,'' Mr Turnbull wrote in an opinion column in 2009. ''The Liberal Party is currently led by people whose conviction on climate change is that it is 'crap' . . . Any policy that is announced will simply be a con, an environmental figleaf to cover a determination to do nothing,'' he wrote then.

Mr Abbott, who once described the ''so-called settled science'' of climate change as ''crap'', now accepts that human actions contribute to global warming. Despite internal grumblings, a spokeswoman for opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt said the Coalition remained committed to Direct Action. The most contentious feature of the Coalition's climate policy is its reliance on using soils to store carbon for about 60 per cent of emissions reductions. It is mocked as ''soil magic'' by some. Members of the independent Climate Commission have warned that soil sequestration will not solve the climate change problem. with Tom Arup Follow the National Times on Twitter