Connect with us
...

Politics

Sunak’s green review threaten UK net zero

Published

on

The prime minister has said he wants to be honest about the “costs and trade-offs” of tackling climate change.

In a statement on Tuesday, Rishi Sunak said he was proud that “Britain is leading the world on climate change”, and will stick by the agreements the UK has made internationally.

But he then overhauled measures designed to meet these targets.

So, is the UK really a world leader on emissions cuts, and how will the changes the PM announced affect its efforts?

How has net zero progress been so far?

Mr Sunak said the government was still “completely committed” to the 2050 net zero target which his predecessor, Theresa May, made law back in 2019.

Net zero means a country does not add any additional greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

“This country is proud to be a world leader in reaching net zero by 2050. But we simply won’t achieve it unless we change. We’ll now have a more pragmatic, proportionate, and realistic approach that eases the burdens on families,” he said.

It is true the UK has been successful in cutting emissions compared to other countries.

Since 1990, emissions within the UK have fallen by 48.7% up to the end of 2022 – excluding international aviation and shipping – according to government data.

These cuts are greater than other countries in the G7 (Group of Seven), an organisation of the world’s seven largest so-called “advanced” economies – although Germany has reduced its emissions at a faster rate compared with the UK since 2015.

But the cuts the UK has made so far are – arguably – the easiest ones.

One of the main ways they have been achieved is by switching away from fossil fuels – coal, oil and gas – to generate electricity.

Emissions from electricity generation have fallen by around three-quarters since 1990, while the proportion of electricity generated by renewables – like wind and solar – has soared.

The government has bold plans to continue this “decarbonisation” process.

But achieving net zero means cutting emissions across all sectors of the economy.

That is why there are targets for phasing out petrol and diesel vehicles and switching from gas boilers to heat pumps or other low-carbon alternatives to heat our homes.

And, despite the UK’s achievements on climate so far, there have been a number of warnings that progress is beginning to falter. These came even before today’s announcement.

Earlier this year, the Climate Change Committee (CCC) – the government’s independent advisers on cutting carbon emissions – warned that the UK’s efforts to meet its net zero commitments were already “worryingly slow”.

It also said it was “markedly less confident” than a year earlier that it would meet its 2030 and 2035 emissions reduction targets.

Similar warnings on electricity have come from the National Audit Office and a cross-party group of MPs.

But contrary to these findings, Mr Sunak claimed in his announcement that the UK was “on track” to meet its commitments.

He also announced a substantial increase in the subsidies available to people who want to install heat pumps to heat their home, with the grant increased by 50% to £7,500.

How would these changes affect net zero?

The CCC says it was not consulted ahead of the announcement, and needed to do the full calculations before determining the carbon cost.

gas boiler
Some people will now be exempt from phase out of installing gas boilers by 2035

But the changes certainly seem to make the current targets much harder to achieve – as any extra carbon costs would have to be balanced by extra savings in other areas. And how much carbon the UK can use in coming years has already been set down in carbon budgets.

“Today’s announcement is likely to take the UK further away from being able to meet its legal commitments,” said Piers Forster, the CCC’s chair.

“This, coupled with the recent unsuccessful offshore wind auction, gives us concern,” and “more action is needed,” he added.

“What’s depressing about all the changes [the PM] has told us about is they all go in the same direction,” Prof Miles Allen of the University of Oxford told the BBC.

“If we do everything slower, we’re just going to make it more difficult to reach that target,” he said.

What will be the effect of delaying the new petrol and diesel car ban?

One of the most eye-catching changes is delaying the 2030 ban on sales of new, fully petrol and diesel cars, announced by Mr Sunak’s predecessor Boris Johnson.

Despite what’s often assumed, electric car sales are actually surging. In 2022, nearly 17% of new car sales were battery electric – ahead of the CCC’s schedule and up from less than 2% in 2019.

Some in the car industry have warned that delaying the ban on new petrol and diesel cars could hit investment and therefore electric vehicle sales.

Achieving the 2030 phase-out of new fully petrol and diesel car and van sales is “vital to meeting the UK’s decarbonisation pathway”, the CCC warned in June.

But Mr Sunak says it should be the consumer who decides whether or not to buy an electric car and not “government forcing you to do it”. He also says the new plan is in line with countries including Germany, France, Spain and Canada.

Fully electric and hybrid car sales have begun to grow more quickly in the last few years, although petrol sales remain higher. [June 2023]

Will this help consumers’ bills?

Mr Sunak says his review of the government’s green pledges is all about putting the “long-term interests of our country before the short-term political needs of the moment.”

He said “some of the things that were being proposed would have cost typical families upwards of five, ten, fifteen thousand pounds”.

But the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) – an independent climate change think tank – points out that nobody is being forced to take up these measures right now.

For example, the planned ban on the sale of new gas boilers was due to start in 2035 for all households. It is only relevant when your boiler breaks or you choose to switch.

It is a similar story with cars. Four out of five of us buy second-hand cars – for which there is no phase-out date – and older cars can continue to be driven after 2030.

The 20% of people who can afford to buy a new car already had six years until they would have had to choose between fully electric vehicles and hybrids – which can be filled up with petrol. Now they have 11 years.

The changes to net zero policy “will add to the cost of living for those struggling, not make things easier”, argues Peter Chalkley, a director of the ECIU.

And an analysis by the ECIU suggests the PM’s announcements could cost British households almost £8bn in higher bills over the next decade – and more if gas prices spike again – due to cancelling new energy efficiency regulations for the private rental sector.

What about the overall investment costs?

The CCC has estimated that meeting the legally binding 2050 goal will require an extra £50bn of investment every year by 2030.

It said that once the savings from reduced use of fossil fuels are factored in, the overall resource cost of the transition to net zero is less than 1% of GDP over the next 30 years. By 2044 it should become cost-saving, the CCC said, as newer cleaner technologies are more efficient than those they are replacing.

Many scientists have pointed out to the BBC that delaying investment simply increases the ultimate cost.

And of course, the global costs of climate inaction would be much higher, as the world would be hit by increasingly damaging climate impacts.

— Reports /TrainViral/

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Gething downfall delivers Starmer 1st headache

Published

on

By

Just when you’d have been forgiven for thinking politics might quieten down a bit…

The Welsh Labour government was for so long a case study in how the party could operate in power during its long years of opposition at Westminster.

And yet here we are less than a fortnight into a UK Labour government, and the Welsh Labour government is imploding.

So much for all that talk about bringing stability back to politics.

Last week Vaughan Gething was sharing smiles here not just with the new prime minister but the King too.

Now, he’s a goner, delivering Sir Keir Starmer a headache rather than a handshake.

When I was here in March covering Mr Gething’s victory, the seeds of his political demise were germinating before our eyes.

The donations row had already sprouted and his defeated opponent, Jeremy Miles, legged it from the venue without so much as any warm words about the victor on camera.

It was another sign of the cultivating anger, the political knotweed that would soon flourish and ensnare Vaughan Gething.

Along came the row about alleged leaking, a sacking, a confidence vote — and a first minister whose tenure up until today at least amounts to 2.4 times that of Liz Truss. Ouch.

Westminster has generated its fair share of turbulence in the last decade.

But it is far from unique as a source of turbulence in UK politics.

In February, Michelle O’Neill became first minister of Northern Ireland with Emma Little-Pengelly her deputy, after a long period without devolved government at Stormont.

In March, we had a new first minister of Wales, when Mark Drakeford stood down and Vaughan Gething took the job.

In April we had the resignation of the first minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf.

He was replaced the following month by John Swinney. June was the quiet month then. Just the small matter of a general election campaign.

And here we are in July, and Mr Gething is resigning.

So will begin another leadership race, a new government in Wales, a new first minister and a new team of senior Welsh ministers.

There will also be more arguments about Welsh Labour – its direction, its priorities, its capacity to govern effectively and its relationship with the UK party.

If you’re watching this in Downing Street, it’s the last thing you need.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Shoplifting crackdown expected to be unveiled

Published

on

By

A crackdown on shoplifting is expected to be announced in the King’s Speech on Wednesday.

The government is due to unveil a new crime bill to target people who steal goods worth less than £200.

The policy would be a reversal of 2014 legislation that meant “low-value” thefts worth under £200 were subject to less serious punishment.

The government is also expected to introduce a specific offence of assaulting a shop worker to its legislative agenda.

It will not be clear until legislation passes through Parliament what the punishments for any new or strengthened offences would be.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that last year was the worst on record for shoplifting in England and Wales.

Police recorded over 430,000 offences in those nations in 2023 – though retailers say underreporting means these figures are likely to represent only a fraction of the true number of incidents.

Michelle Whitehead, who works at a convenience store in Wolverhampton, said her shop had been “hit every day” by thieves.

People were stealing “absolutely anything” including “tins of spam, tins of corned beef, all the fresh meat”, Ms Whitehead told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“They’re just coming in, getting their whole arm and sweeping the lot off the shelves,” she said. “The shelves were always empty.”

She said she believed “organised” criminal gangs, rather than individuals struggling with the cost of living, were behind the thefts in her shop.

The crackdown on “low-value” shoplifting “will help a lot of little shops,” Ms Whitehead said.

While retailers and shop workers have welcomed the anticipated proposals, a civil liberties group has raised concerns about criminalising people struggling to make ends meet and overburdening the prison system.

The new legal measures are expected to be announced as part of the King’s Speech on Wednesday, a key piece of the State Opening of Parliament that allows the government to outline its priorities over the coming months.

Before the general election, the Labour Party pledged to reverse what it described as the “shoplifter’s charter” – a piece of 2014 legislation that reduced the criminal punishment for “low-value shoplifting”.

Tom Holder, spokesperson for the British Retail Consortium (BRC), told BBC News the impact of the 2014 legislation has been to “deprioritise it in the eyes of police”.

“I think police would be less likely to turn up to what they see as low-level theft,” he said.

Shoplifting cost retailers £1.8 billion in the last year, which could impact prices, according to the BRC.

“Shoplifting harms everyone in that sense – those costs eventually get made up somewhere, whether it’s prices going up or other prices that can’t come down,” Mr Holder said.

Co-op campaigns and public affairs director Paul Gerrard said the supermarket chain had also recorded rising theft and violence against shop workers.

“There’s always been people who will steal to make ends meet. That’s not what is behind the rise we’ve seen,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday. “What’s behind that rise is individuals and gangs targeting large volumes of stock in stores for resale in illicit venues like pubs, clubs, markets, and out the back of cars.”

But Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty, had concerns about the expected proposals, saying there is “already a wide range of powers” the police can use to tackle shoplifting and anti-social behaviour levelled at retail staff.

Ms Beck said the “£200 threshold” would not just target criminal gangs but also “people who are pushed into the desperate situation of not paying for things” because they cannot afford to make ends meet.

She urged the government to avoid focusing on “criminal justice and policing solutions instead of doing the thoughtful work of looking at the root causes of crime, which we believe are related to poverty and inequality”.

Ms Beck also argued the additional legislation could serve to worsen the UK’s “enormous court backlog” and its “bursting prison system”.

Last week, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release thousands of prisoners early to ease overcrowding in the country’s prisons.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said the government would not comment on the King’s Speech until it has been delivered by the monarch.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council has been approached for comment.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Government launches ‘root and branch’ review

Published

on

By

Defence Secretary John Healey hailed the government’s defence review as the “first of its kind” and said it will “take a fresh look at the challenges we face”.

Mr Healey noted the “increasing instability and uncertainty” around the world, including the conflict in the Middle East and war in Ukraine, and said “threats are growing”.

The strategic defence review will consider the current state of the armed forces, the threats the UK faces and the capabilities needed to address them.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously said the review will set out a “roadmap” to the goal of spending 2.5% of national income on defence – a target he has made a “cast iron” commitment to but is yet to put a timeline on.

On Monday, the prime minister said the “root and branch review” of the armed forces would help prepare the UK for “a more dangerous and volatile world”.

The review will invite submissions from the military, veterans, MPs, the defence industry, the public, academics and the UK’s allies until the end of September and aims to deliver its findings in the first half of 2025.

“I promised the British people I would deliver the change needed to take our country forward, and I promised action not words,” Sir Keir said.

“That’s why one of my first acts since taking office is to launch our strategic defence review.

“We will make sure our hollowed out armed forces are bolstered and respected, that defence spending is responsibly increased, and that our country has the capabilities needed to ensure the UK’s resilience for the long term.”

The review will be overseen by Defence Secretary John Healey and headed by former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson along with former US presidential advisor Fiona Hill and former Joint Force Commander Gen Sir Richard Barrons.

The group will have their work cut out.

The global security threats facing the UK and its Western allies are more serious and more complex than at any time since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

They also coincide with what many commentators have said is a catastrophic running down of the UK’s armed forces to the point where the country is arguably no longer considered to be a Tier One military force.

In terms of the number of troops in its regular forces, the British Army is now at its smallest size since the time of the Napoleonic Wars two centuries ago.

Recruitment is failing to match retention, with many soldiers and officers complaining about neglected and substandard accommodation.

The Royal Navy, which has spent vast sums on its two centrepiece aircraft carriers, is in need of many more surface ships to fulfil its tasks around the globe.

Its ageing fleet of nuclear-armed Vanguard submarines, the cornerstone of the UK’s strategic defence and known as the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD), is overdue for replacement by four Dreadnought class submarines and costs are mounting.

Commenting on the review, Mr Healey said: “Hollowed-out armed forces, procurement waste and neglected morale cannot continue.”

Too many UK commitments?

The defence and security threats facing the UK, Nato and its allies further afield are multiple.

They include a war raging on Europe’s eastern flank in Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion. The UK, along with the EU and Nato, has opted to help defend Ukraine with multi-billion pound packages of weapons and aid, stopping short of committing combat troops.

The policy behind this is not entirely altruistic. European governments, especially those closest to Russia like Poland and the Baltic states, fear that if President Putin wins the war in Ukraine it will not be long before he rebuilds his army and invades them next.

Some of those countries are already busy beefing up their own defence spending closer to 3% or even 4% of GDP.

The challenge for Nato has been how to provide Ukraine with as much weaponry as it can, without provoking Russia into retaliating against a Nato state and risk triggering a third world war.

The Royal Navy has been in action recently in the Red Sea, where it has been operating alongside the US Navy in fending off attacks on shipping by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

But the UK has also made naval commitments further afield in the South China Sea with the Aukus pact, comprising of Australia, UK and the US, aimed at containing Chinese expansion in the region.

Critics have questioned whether a financially-constrained UK can afford to make commitments like this on the other side of the world.

Closer to home in Europe, there is a growing threat from so-called “hybrid warfare” attacks, suspected of coming from Russia.

These are anonymous, unattributable attacks on undersea pipelines and telecoms cables on which Western nations depend.

As tensions increase with Moscow there are fears such actions will only increase and the UK cannot possibly hope to guard all of its coastline all of the time.

But while those nervous Nato partners living close to Russia’s borders are busy beefing up their defence spending closer to 3 or even 4% of GDP, the UK has so far declined to put a timetable on when it will raise its own defence spending to just 2.5%.

Opposition figures have criticised the government for refusing to say when defence spending will be increased.

Before his election defeat, former prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to reaching 2.5% by 2030.

Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge previously said: “In a world that is more volatile and dangerous than at any time since the Cold War, Keir Starmer’s Labour government had a clear choice to match the Conservatives’ fully funded pledge to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030.

“By failing to do so, they’ve created huge uncertainty for our armed forces, at the worst possible time.”

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 TechDaja News.