The Australian Greens claim the incoming Coalition government is acting unlawfully by rushing through changes to environmental policy without parliamentary approval.
The concerns come after the Abbott government directed the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to suspend all loans for renewable energy projects.
The corporation is an independent statutory body and the Greens argue legislation needs to be passed by parliament before any loans can be suspended.
It comes as the Abbott government promises to immediately push ahead with new legislation to repeal the carbon tax.
In his victory speech on election night, Prime Minister Tony Abbott made a direct promise to Coalition supporters on the carbon tax.
"In three years time, the carbon tax will be gone, the boats will be stopped, the budget will be on track for a believable surplus and the roads of the 21st Century will finally be well underway."
Mr Abbott's promise to repeal the carbon tax has faced some initial hurdles with the Australian Greens indicating they would block the move in the Senate.
The Greens are likely to hold the balance of power in the upper house until next July when a group of newly-elected minor party Senators will take up their seats.
The new Senators are likely to include representatives from the Palmer United Party, the Liberal Democratic Party and the Motor Enthusiasts' Party, which all back moves to repeal the carbon tax.
The Labor opposition has not reached a united position so far on whether it would vote against any legislation to repeal the carbon tax.
The Australian Greens believe the Abbott government has shown some early signs of arrogance on its approach to climate change policy.
The government has pushed ahead with plans to suspend loans to the 10-billion dollar Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
The Corporation was set up in 2012 by the Gillard government as an independent statutory body which co-finances and invests, directly and indirectly, in clean energy projects and technologies.
Prior to the federal election, Senate clerk Rosemary Laing advised the Coalition that legislation would be needed to close the corporation and a minister who acted without that legislation could risk "serious legal consequences."
Greens Senator Richard Di Natale says the government has chosen to ignore that advice at its own peril.
"I think it's absolutely critical that the Coalition reverses the decision to instruct the Clean Energy Corporation to stop providing financial support to businesses that are investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency. That would be a huge mistake, not just because of the substance of the policy, but it would also be illegal."
The Coalition has defended its actions, saying it won a convincing majority in the House of Representatives at the election and is merely fulfilling its mandate to make changes to current climate change policies.
However, Senator Di Natale believes the new government's policies should be carefully scrutinised by the Senate.
He believes the Coalition is acting hypocritically, given in opposition it also voted against Labor's legislation to set up an Emissions Trading Scheme in 2007 after the Rudd Government came to power.
Senator Di Natale says many voters may have backed the Coalition in the House of Representatives but supported the Greens in the Senate and the government therefore does not have a clear mandate.
"People vote on a variety of issues. They vote often to remove a government as much as they vote to elect an opposition and what people need to also acknowledge is that in the Senate, people will vote differently and will often vote for parties specifically because of the positions that they have taken on things like climate change and in fact that's where the Greens derive a lot of their support."
As well as abolishing the carbon tax, the Coalition has promised to introduce what it's calling a direct action policy on climate change.
This would involve activities such as planting more trees and improving soil carbon.
The research centre, the Climate Institute, says the Coalition's climate change policy should be carefully scrutinised in the new parliament.
The institute's Deputy Director Dr Irwin Jackson says market-based emissions trading schemes are more effective than taxpayer-funded ones, and it is critical to get the business community involved in any strategy to tackle climate change.
Dr Jackson believes the Coalition's plans won't go far enough towards meeting its own emissions reduction targets.
"We've got to determine what is best for the country and we shouldn't be considering repealing the carbon laws until we've had a pretty good look at the alternative that the Coalition is putting up. All independent analysis to date has shown that as it currently stands, the Coalition's policy cannot meet the targets that it says it's committed to of a five to 25 per cent (emissions) reduction by 2020."
Associate Professor Haydon Manning specialises in Australian politics at Flinders University in Adelaide.
He believes the Coalition is unlikely to push for a fresh election in a bid to weaken the Greens and get the necessary support it needs in the Senate to get its legislation through to repeal the carbon tax.
Dr Manning believes it will instead wait until it gets the support of newly-elected senators who won't take up their seats until next July.
However Dr Manning says he believes the government is still likely to introduce legislation to the Senate before then.
He says it would do so to try and cause political embarassment for Labor and the Greens by arguing that they are effectively denying households and businesses relief from high electricity prices.
"I think what they'll do is put it to the Senate. It will be rejected and they will put it to the Senate again and it will be rejected again and along the way, they will beat up Labor and the Greens over that issue. They will play politics with it. Then instead of taking the two rejections which they could do to the Governor General and saying 'Look Governor General, key parts of my legislative program are blocked. I wish to see both houses of parliament dissolved and we should have a new election.' Abbott could do that. But he won't."
By Michael Kenny.
