Aussie taxpayers fork out millions for luxury Fiji resorts for Chris Bowen’s climate change talk-fest – as doubts grow over whether world leaders will even show up
Australian taxpayers are set to spend more than A$5.6 million on luxury hotel accommodation for a "pre-COP" climate meeting in Fiji, a preparatory gathering ahead of the main COP31 UN climate summit due to be held in Antalya, Turkey, in November. Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen will chair four days of talks in Nadi from 5 to 8 October in his role as COP31 President of Negotiations, with the Fiji leg agreed as a compromise after Turkey beat a joint Australia-Pacific bid to host the main event. Critics argue the spending is wasteful, particularly as it channels money to Fijian rather than Australian businesses, and comes amid doubts over how many world leaders will actually attend.
Government procurement records show contracts worth over $2.1 million with the operator of the five-star Sheraton Fiji Golf and Beach Resort and $2.08 million with the operator of the Sofitel Fiji Resort and Spa, alongside smaller contracts at several other hotels, taking total accommodation costs above $5.6 million as part of a wider $19.8 million event budget. Only five leaders from outside the Pacific region — from Thailand, Antigua and Barbuda, Cabo Verde, the Maldives and Timor-Leste — have so far confirmed attendance, while the US, UK and China have yet to say whether their leaders will attend. Daily Mail political editor Peter van Onselen described the spending as a disgrace, arguing it does nothing for Australian tourism or hospitality businesses while ordinary Australians face cost-of-living pressures.
- Australia spends $5.6m on luxury Fiji hotels for pre-COP31 climate talks
- Talks precede the main COP31 summit in Antalya, Turkey, in November
- Only five non-Pacific leaders confirmed; US, UK, China undecided
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that hosting pre-COP talks is a routine and necessary part of holding the COP31 presidency, and that holding this leg in Fiji honours Australia's partnership with Pacific nations, who are among the most vulnerable to climate change and were central to the original joint bid. They contend that investing in Pacific venues strengthens regional ties at a time of strategic competition for influence in the Pacific, and that functioning accommodation and infrastructure for negotiators are unavoidable costs of hosting any major diplomatic gathering, regardless of which or how many leaders ultimately attend in person. On this view, the substantive negotiating work happens whether or not high-profile leaders show up, so judging the spend solely on attendance numbers misses the point of the exercise.
The case against
Critics argue that spending over $5.6 million of Australian taxpayers' money on luxury five-star resorts is difficult to justify when the funds flow to Fijian rather than Australian businesses and ordinary households are grappling with cost-of-living pressures at home. They point to the uncertainty over whether major powers such as the US, UK and China will send their leaders as evidence that the outlay may not deliver commensurate diplomatic value, and see the choice of upscale accommodation as poor optics for a summit ostensibly focused on climate responsibility and restraint. For them, public money committed to international talk-fests should be held to a higher standard of demonstrable benefit before being spent on premium hospitality abroad.