Climate

Ministers failed to outline exactly how their net zero strategy will achieve emissions targets, a court ruled on Monday – dealing the government’s climate change credentials a serious blow on the day Britain sweltered under its first ever red extreme temperature alert.Proposals for meeting emission targets were too vague for business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng to claim in parliament that the government was on track to fulfil its global warming promises, the High Court said.Detailed analysis was omitted from the strategy even though “it is plain from the evidence before the court that the information existed at the time”, Mr Justice Holgate concluded.Legal campaigners the Good Law Project, who mounted the challenge with Friends of the Earth and Client Earth, said the ruling amounted to a finding that the strategy was “illegal and inadequate” and said Mr Kwarteng had been ordered to produce an improved version within eight months and to pay the activists’ costs.The embarrassing setback came as an influential parliamentary committee warned of a “major hole at the centre of government” over the resilience of the UK’s critical national infrastructure to climate change.RecommendedAnd Boris Johnson was accused of “clocking off” as he missed a third meeting of the government’s emergency Cobra committee to discuss the heatwave, which saw flights disrupted by melting runways at Luton airport and RAF Brize Norton as temperatures topped 38C.Record temperature levels were broken twice in a day in Wales, and firefighters reported at least 24 wildfires in 48 hours in England and Wales – double the number recorded in all of July last year.Tuesday is expected to be even warmer, with some forecasts estimating highs of 43C – well above the previous peak of 38.7C recorded in 2019.People are being advised not to travel on public transport unless “absolutely necessary”, while multiple schools have told The Independent that around a third of their pupils – or in some cases more than half – are absent today.Experts said that more must be done to “heat-proof” the country, which is “not built for 40C”.Professor Hannah Cloke, a natural hazards researcher at the University of Reading, said “severe heatwaves are a problem that’s not going away – and they will get worse.”She added: “We can no longer tolerate poor design of our buildings and our cities, and we urgently need to think about things like reducing overheating, shading, trees, building for cooling, and providing these public cooling spaces … because we’re not prepared and we’re not built for 40 degrees.”All five of the contenders for the Conservative leadership are now committed to Mr Johnson’s 2050 target for net zero carbon emissions in the UK, after Kemi Badenoch became to last to back the goal.But Ms Badenoch later branded the deadline a “red herring” and indicated she was ready to let it slip to avoid damaging the UK’s economy, telling Talk TV’s The News Desk: “There are circumstances where I would delay it…“The legislation we’ve put in is for 2050. That is a long, long time in the future. Practically none of us will still be here to be held accountable for it. So, I think it’s a red herring.“What would happen if we moved it to 2060 or 2070? We’re not going to be here. Let’s be realistic about what we can do now with the responsibility and the power and the levers that we have available.”Monday’s High Court ruling found that information supplied by officials to Mr Kwarteng about the effectiveness of various climate change policies was not precise enough for him to be able to assure MPs to a “legally essential” standard that the government was on track for net zero.And it said the net zero strategy did not make clear that official predictions were for 95 per cent of emissions to be eliminated, rather than 100 per cent, or explain how the 5 per cent shortfall could be made up.The Good Law Project said: “The dangerous heatwave this week is a stark reminder of the very real threat we face.“Our infrastructure and homes were designed for a climate that no longer exists. This cannot wait. The net zero target must be a road map to a sustainable future – not a lie we tell our children.”A Beis spokesperson said: “The Net Zero Strategy remains government policy and has not been quashed. The judge made no criticism about the substance of our plans which are well on track and, in fact, the claimants themselves described them as ‘laudable’ during the proceedings.”Meanwhile, parliament’s joint committee on the national security strategy blasted government minister Michael Ellis for refusing to give evidence to its inquiry on how critical national infrastructure, like power networks, railway lines and roads, is being prepared for the effects of climate change.Despite previously describing himself as the minister “responsible for resilience and security”, Mr Ellis told the committee he would not attend a 4 July hearing as he was “not best placed to give evidence” on a “technical and specialist matter”.Committee chair Margaret Beckett said: “The unfortunate impression that we are gaining … is that there are no ministers with responsibility for the resilience of critical national infrastructure to the effects of climate change, nor for cross-government climate adaptation efforts. This would be quite a shocking admission from the government.”Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said Mr Johnson appeared to have “checked out” as the prime minister missed a Cobra meeting on the heatwave to attend Farnborough Air Show, where he boasted to business leaders about his record in office and recounted how he had taken the controls of a Typhoon fighter jet on a visit to RAF Coningsby last week.The PM was previously criticised for missing a Cobra meeting on the heatwave on Saturday, when he hosted a farewell party for supporters at country retreat Chequers.“For many people it’s going to be a real struggle today and tomorrow in the heat, and they’re seeing a prime minister who’s basically checked out, so he’s not really doing anything,” said Starmer.And London mayor Sadiq Khan said Mr Johnson should resign immediately rather than enjoy a “joyride” on a fighter jet and “go on a jolly”.But Downing Street insisted it was “not unusual” for meetings of the emergency committee to led by ministers rather than the PM. Cabinet Office minister Kit Malthouse, who took the chair today, said Mr Johnson was being regularly updated and denounced what he said was “a politically motivated assault upon the prime minister, which is completely unfair”.The shadow climate change secretary Ed Miliband told The Independent: “While Britain boils, the Conservatives bury their heads in the sand about the greatest long-term threat our country faces, the climate crisis.“For years we have heard the warnings about a rapidly warming world. But Tory politicians failed to listen. Now, as Britain swelters and our railways melt, the Conservatives waste their time on fantasy economics and climate denial.Recommended“Britain faces a choice – higher energy bills, instability and the chaos of a rapidly warming world with the Conservatives, or a plan for a green energy sprint to tackle the climate crisis and the cost of living crisis with Labour.”A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said: “The net zero strategy remains government policy and has not been quashed. The judge made no criticism about the substance of our plans which are well on track and, in fact, the claimants themselves described them as ‘laudable’ during the proceedings.” More

Taking action on the climate emergency is the bottom priority for Conservative members in the party’s leadership contest, a poll has found.Just 4 per cent of those surveyed by pollster YouGov said hitting the UK’s net zero emissions target by 2050 was one of their top three priorities for the next prime minister.The survey, commissioned by the Times found that winning a general election, cutting taxes, increasing defend spending and strengthening the UK’s global standing were all more important to members.Out of the 10 policy areas listed, reaching net zero was placed bottom.The news comes as an “unprecedented” heatwave triggers red warnings and advance to remain inside across southern Britain, with temperatures expected to reach 40 degrees celsius.RecommendedWhile the YouGov survey suggests apathy to the climate emergency among the governing party faithful, previous research has suggested that this does not necessarily translate into antipathy. The Independent last week reported a poll of members conducted by Opinium that only a small minority, 37 per cent, of Tory members think the UK government is “overreacting” with its climate policies.22 per cent of Tory members believed the government had been underreacting while 30 per cent say it is getting the balance of action about right – an apparently endorsement of net zero.That finding came despite a push from figures on the British right like ex Brexit party leader Nigel Farage and Tory backbencher Steve Baker to campaign against the policy. Out of all the Tory leadership candidates only Rishi Sunak has been vocal in his support of the net zero target without reservation, and right-winger Kemi Badenoch has described it as “unilateral economic disarmament”.She and other conservatives argue that the UK can gain an advantage by not pulling its weight on climate targets. Under net zero, the UK would have to produce no more carbon than it absorbs by 2050. There is a scientific consensus that this approach is required to avert catastrophic climate disaster, though some significant effects will still be felt.RecommendedPolling by Ipsos MORI conducted in October found widespread public support for both net zero in principle and for policies such as frequent flier levies and phasing out gas boilers. Half (54 per cent) of UK voters think that the country should be reducing its carbon emissions to net zero sooner than 2050, with 83 per cent extremely, very or fairly worried about climate change. More

Conservative leadership hopeful Tom Tugendhat has backtracked on remarks which appeared to cast doubt on his commitment to the party’s net zero target.The row comes as fears grow that Boris Johnson’s successor as prime minister will ditch the pledge to reach net zero emissions by 2050.Chris Skidmore – the former energy minister who leads the Net Zero Support Group of environmentalist backbenchers – tweeted that Mr Tugendhat had told a hustings event the target should be moved back.But Mr Tugendhat, the perceived moderate left in the race, claimed he was merely questioning how best to achieve the 2050 net zero emissions.Asked about his views by reporters on Thursday, he said: “Of course I agree with the target, but nobody yet has set out a path to achieving it.”RecommendedRishi Sunak, Penny Mordaunt and Liz Truss all offered clear backing for the 2050 net zero target at Wednesday night’s hustings, according to Mr Skidmore.But Kemi Badenoch said she wanted to change the “concept” of the target, while Suella Braverman said the 2050 date should be moved back.A Tory source told The Independent that Mr Tugendhat told MPs that the landmark date should be looked at again.But the moderate appeared to offer his support for the push to cleaner energy supply when speaking to reporters on Thursday, saying it was vital to invest in new technologies.“We keep talking about net zero as a cost – it is also a benefit,” he told reporters. “We could be imitating the Norwegians and actually making money from carbon capture.”Senior Tory MP Steve Baker – founder of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group – has suggested that he would push for the next PM to dismantle the government’s climate agenda.Ms Braverman, Mr Baker’s favoured candidate, has said the party should “suspend the all-consuming desire to achieve net zero by 2050”.Ms Badenoch has also publicly branded the net zero target “unilateral economic disarmament” and has vowed to ditch policies which “consume taxpayers hard-earned money”.Ms Truss, Ms Badenoch and Ms Mordaunt all said they would suspend green taxes on energy bills. The levies help pay for investment in renewable energy needed to move Britain away from fossil fuel dependence.“I’d have a temporary moratorium on the green energy levy … while looking at the best way of delivering net zero,” Ms Truss told The Spectator.Conservative peer Zac Goldsmith told The Independent earlier this week that it would be better to have a Labour government than a Tory leader who “deprioritises” action on net zero.And Alok Sharma, the former business minister and president of the Cop26 climate conference, has also warned Tory leadership that backtracking on net zero is “a road to nowhere”.RecommendedMeanwhile, Mr Tugendhat – who won 37 votes in the first round – has denied he would be dropping out of the Tory race. “I’m still in this fight,” he said.Telling reporters that he had been wooed by other candidates to back them, he said: “I feel like a prom queen”. More

Britain’s top business leaders have urged the Conservative leadership candidates hoping to succeed Boris Johnson not to ditch or backslide on the government’s net zero climate commitments.Groups representing thousands of UK businesses – including Unilever, Coca-Cola, Scottish Power, Thames Water and Lloyds Banking Group – have called on contenders to uphold policies aimed at achieving net zero by 2050.It comes as MPs and peers warn that “siren voices” from net zero sceptics on the Tory backbenches are hoping to move leadership hopefuls away from policies aimed at tackling climate change.Right-wing contender Kemi Badenoch has branded the net zero target “unilateral economic disarmament” and vowed to axe it, while Suella Braverman said the party should “suspend the all-consuming desire to achieve net zero by 2050”.A coalition of leading corporate bodies – including the Food and Drink Federation, the International Chamber of Commerce and UK Corporate Leaders Group (CLG) – have shared an open letter warning not to abandon the party’s manifesto commitment.Eliot Whittington, director of CLG, warned that a retreat on net zero policies would “condemn the country to fall behind on the energy transition and face unnecessary costs and risks”.RecommendedHe added: “Forward-looking businesses want more, not less, ambition on climate action – especially as we see the ramifications of volatile fossil fuel supply chains ramping up the cost-of-living crisis and reducing regional energy security.”The coalition of business chiefs said investment in green infrastructure and technology would help driving jobs and growth, in a letter coordinated by the UK Business Group Alliance for Net Zero, led by Cambridge University’s pro-climate business group CLG.Amanda Mackenzie, chief executive of Business in the Community, called on all those hoping to enter No 10 in September to “deliver” on a clear transition to a net zero. “Turning away now is the wrong solution,” she said.Julie Hirigoyen, chief executive of UK Green Building Council, added: “As prices soar businesses are looking for the next prime minister to deliver on the UK’s legal climate commitments, not ditch them.”Senior MP Steve Baker – founder of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group (NZSG) of Tory backbenchers – has suggested that he would push for the next PM to dismantle the government’s climate agenda.Ms Badenoch, appealing to the sceptics, told her campaign launch on Tuesday: “Too many policies, like net zero targets, [were] set up with no thought to the effects on industries in the poorer parts of this country.”Conservative peer Zac Goldsmith previously told The Independent it would be better to have a Labour government than a Tory leader who “deprioritises” action on net zero.The ally of Mr Johnson added: “It would be a catastrophic error for Conservatives to select a candidate who deprioritises these issues, but if they do, then we can only hope voters replace the party at the [next] available election.”Chris Skidmore, a senior backbencher who chairs the Net Zero Support Group set up to rival Mr Baker’s band of sceptics, has vowed to push candidates to uphold Britain’s climate commitments.“We can’t put net zero at risk,” Mr Skidmore, the former energy minister who signed the 2050 target into law, told The Independent. “I devoutly believe net zero is a vote winner.”RecommendedAlok Sharma, the former business minister who acted as president of the Cop26 climate conference, has warned Tory leadership hopefuls not to backslide on the net zero pledge.“Economically, environmentally and electorally it would be a retrograde step for us to resile from this policy. It’s a road to nowhere,” he told the i newspaper.Asked if frontrunner Rishi Sunak is fully behind policies aimed at achieving net zero emissions by 2050, he said: “I will wait to see what all the candidates say on this particular issue, which is very important for me.” More

Boris Johnson sent for his ministerial jet to fly back from Cornwall to London after a family trip to the beach.The prime minister and wife Carrie took their children Wilf and Romy to the seaside in Porthminster, St Ives, during the weekend visit to the Southwest.Downing Street insisted the “sole reason” for the flight was to transport Mr Johnson and staff back from government business. The government plane was sent from London to Royal Naval Air Station Culdrose, near Helston, on the morning of Monday 13 June, the Sunday Mirror first reported.On the Friday before, Mr Johnson went to the Royal Cornwall Show, where he visited cattle and sheep tents and spoke to local traders. He also met farmers with Conservative candidate Helen Hurford ahead of the 23 June Tiverton and Honiton by-election, which the Lib Dems won in a major blow to the PM.Over the weekend, Mr Johnson was seen enjoying the sunshine on at beach at St Ives. On Monday of the flight, he went to Southern England Farms in Hayle, where he was photographed driving a tractor, trimming a courgette and weighing broccoli, before flying back to London.Emily Thornberry, Labour’s shadow Attorney General, accused of the PM of “treating the government’s official plane as his personal taxi service, regardless of what it costs the environment or the taxpayer”.“It’s the act of a man drunk on power, who needs to be told he’s had enough,” she added.A No 10 spokesperson said: “All travel decisions are made with consideration for security and time restraints.”The PM is accompanied on government business by a delegation of staff, which is taken into consideration as part of ensuring taxpayer value for money.”This was the sole reason for the plane being used to transport the PM and his staff back from this particular visit.”Boris Johnson was last year accused of “staggering hypocrisy” after he took a private jet back from the Cop26 climate summit to attend a private members’ club dinner in London.His Cornwall trip also raises questions about whether the flight was justified under the ministerial code.”Ministers must ensure that they always make efficient and cost-effective travel arrangements,” the rulebook states.”Official transport should not normally be used for travel arrangements arising from party or private business, except where this is justified on security grounds.”Family members are permitted to join ministers on the trips “provided that it is clearly in the public interest”.The same plane was used for Mr Johnson’s diplomatic visit to Rwanda, Germany and Spain.During the G7 summit in Schloss Elmau, the Prime Minister and Canada’s Justin Trudeau compared the relative sizes of their jets.Mr Johnson said he had seen “Canada Force One” on the tarmac and Mr Trudeau joked that the Prime Minister’s plane was bigger.”Very modest” was how Mr Johnson described his own jet. More

Environmental campaigners have cautiously welcomed a move by the UK’s export finance agency to stop making new investments in fossil fuels overseas.UK Export Finance has in the past been criticised for providing funds for British businesses exploiting oil and gas abroad – effectively subsidising fossil fuels and driving climate change.But the government agency says from this year it is not providing any new support to new fossil fuel projects for the first time.The organisation extends loans to British businesses wanting to work abroad to give them a competitive advantage and help them export.UKEF has provided £7.4 billion of government support for UK exports in the last year, supporting 72,000 UK jobs and adding a gross value of £4.3 billion to the economy.The investments cost the taxpayer nothing overall as they produce a net profit for the Treasury, in 2021-22 of £324 million.The agency has also unveiled new carbon reduction targets for its other investments so that it it takes the carbon produced by them into account, and has confirmed it was not planning to make fossil fuel investments going forward. Environmentalists said the change was positive but that there was more to do.Friends of the Earth’s International climate campaigner, Rachel Kennerley, said: “While it’s good news that UKEF hasn’t invested in fossil fuel developments overseas this year, they are still financing a huge gas development in Mozambique that’s fuelling violence and climate breakdown.“Friends of the Earth is currently challenging this ill-conceived investment in the UK courts.“Instead, UK taxpayers’ money should be investing in Africa’s huge renewable energy potential so people without electricity have access to clean, safe energy.”UKEF has set new targets to reduce absolute emissions (tCO2e) of its existing oil and gas sector investments by 75 per cent by 2030.It also plans to reduce so-called “economic emissions intensity” of investments in the power sector by 58 per cent by 2030 work to net-zero basis by 2050.On the domestic front the government has been criticised for effectively subsidising oil and gas production at home with new tax reliefs unveiled in Rishi Sunak’s budget.Anne-Marie Trevelyan, Secretary of State for International Trade, commented: “The UK is awash with untapped export potential. “We have opened the door to the world with historic trade deals and now we are helping businesses walk through it. That’s why our national export credit agency, UK Export Finance, is boosting firms’ ability to export to the world with record-breaking support year after year.” More

The UK’s expanded £1bn commitment to military aid for Ukraine will be partly funded through underspending on climate finance, the business minister Kwasi Kwarteng has said. Following the British government’s announcement it would nearly double support to Ukraine to help stave off the Russian invasion, Mr Kwarteng tweeted: “My department has contributed to the effort by surrendering climate finance and foreign aid underspends.”The admission comes a month after The Independent revealed the UK government failed to deliver almost a quarter of a billion pounds in green projects aimed at hitting net zero emissions even as Boris Johnson urged governments around the world to drastically raise their investment in tackling the climate crisis.Some £241m earmarked for cancelling out UK carbon emissions by 2050 was handed back to the Treasury in the last financial year by the business department. But it appears the underspent money now going to Ukraine may have originally been earmarked for international climate projects and could represent further underspending by the department.An official at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) told The Independent they could not provide figures for how much of the underspend would now be used by the Treasury for military assistance in Ukraine. However they did identify the underspend as being in the International Climate Finance (ICF) programme, and money from Official Development Assistance (ODA), which is government aid money that promotes and targets the economic development and welfare of developing countries.The admission of the underspend by BEIS comes months before the Cop27 climate conference in Egypt, where climate finance is set to be on the top of the agenda, and also just hours after the climate change committee said there were “major failures” in government plans to reach net zero emissions.Ami McCarthy, a political campaigner for Greenpeace, told The Independent: “It’s incredibly jarring that one day after government climate advisers called out the UK’s lack of climate action, our business secretary is boasting about having climate money left over.“The government now finds itself in the astonishing position of still paying fossil fuel money to [Vladimir] Putin, while sending its climate underspend to [Volodymyr] Zelensky – it’s gross.”She added: “At a time of a fossil fuel-funded war, an energy crisis, a cost of living crisis and a climate crisis, the government should be throwing the kitchen sink at climate solutions – not ending up with leftover cash that’s unspent.“The business secretary needs to get on with his job, and take action now to roll out heat pumps, home insulation, and onshore wind; cutting our own energy usage and reducing our reliance on Russian gas and oil. This would stop us funding Putin’s war, it would tackle the climate crisis and bring bills down too. For all these crises the solutions are the same.”Carla Denyer, co-leader of the Green Party, told The Independent: “We have to question how on earth a government that claims to be a leader in tackling climate change could have an underspend on tackling this global threat. It is understandable that the government wants to spend more helping Ukraine, but this money should come out of budgets that will further damage our climate: pots such as the £28bn earmarked for road building, and ending tax breaks for fossil fuel projects.” The announcement of new funding for military aid to support Ukraine brings the UK’s support to Kyiv to a total of £2.3bn.The UK has also spent £1.5bn on humanitarian and economic support for Ukraine since the invasion in February.On Thursday, Mr Johnson also committed to raising UK defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP.But Tobias Ellwood, the Tory chairman of the Commons defence committee, said it is “too little, too late”.Mr Ellwood, who has called for per cent of GDP to be spent on defence, also condemned Mr Johnson for going ahead with planned cuts to the size of the Army.“This is NOT the time to cut the Army by 10,000,” he said on Twitter.“And moving to 2.5 per cent defence spend by 2030 is too little too late.”Conservative MP Julian Lewis, the chair of parliament’s intelligence and security committee, described the spending increase as “feeble”, accusing the prime minister of “an inability or unwillingness to face up to the gravity of the current crisis”.It is understood the pledge could amount to an extra £55.1bn cumulatively over the rest of the decade, based on Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts of the size of the economy.Speaking at the end of a Nato conference in Spain, Mr Johnson urged struggling Britons to accept that the “cost of freedom is always worth paying”, amid fears of Ukraine war “fatigue” as living standards fall at home.The prime minister sought to bolster faith that funding Ukraine would be worth it, arguing a Russian victory would worsen the economic situation. “Unless we get the right result in Ukraine, Putin will be in a position to commit further acts of aggression against other parts of the former Soviet Union more or less with impunity,” he said.“That will drive further global uncertainty, further oil shocks, further panics and more economic distress for the whole world.” More

A Tory donor who helped fund a lobby group campaigning against net-zero climate action will be made a member of the House of Lords, it has been reported.Australian billionaire Michael Hintze, who funds the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), will receive a peerage, according to the Sunday Times.Greenpeace UK accuses the organisation of “spending the last 20 years campaigning to preserve our addiction to fossil fuels”.Green MP Caroline Lucas blasted the appointment as “utter hypocrisy” considering the prime minister’s net-zero climate pledges and called for an investigation.She told DeSmog: “It’s already an insult to democracy that the prime minister is stuffing the House of Lords with his billionaire Tory donors.“But the fact that those billionaires are funding climate denial and delay – barely six months after he claimed we were at ‘one minute to midnight’ in a race to avert the impending climate crisis – exposes the utter hypocrisy of any climate pledge that comes out of his mouth.”Mr Hintze, founder and co-chief executive of the global asset management fund CQS, is a major Tory donor.The GWPF campaigns against the UK’s 2050 net-zero target and recently published a paper claiming that there is “no evidence of a climate crisis” – a claim at odds with the vast majority of climate scientists.The GWPF and the Conservative Party have been contacted for comment.Last month the Independent reported how the GWPF – which has close links to Tory MP Steve Baker – has received hundreds of thousands of pounds from an oil-rich foundation with large investments in energy firms.The GWPF refuses to disclose its donors in the UK and says it does not take money from fossil fuel interests.But US tax documents identified by investigative journalists at the OpenDemocracy website show the lobbyists, who also use the brand “Net Zero Watch”, have a donor with $30 million (£24.2 million) shares in 22 companies working across coal, oil and gas. More