Climate

Conservative MPs from the so-called “red wall” seats won from Labour at the last election have declared their support for a controversial new coal mine in Cumbria. The Northern Research Group MPs accused Labour of turning its back on northern communities by opposing the development at Whitehaven.In a letter to Cumbria County Council’s Labour leader, the 31 NRG MPs – joined by civic leaders from the north of England and a further 12 Tory MPs from elsewhere in the country – warned that threats to block the mine represent a “serious risk” to the area’s economy and jobs.But Labour’s business spokesperson Lucy Powell accused them of “ trying to con people with a false promise”, insisting the mine was not the answer to provide a long-term future for industry.The West Cumbria Mining plans to dig coking coal for use in the UK steel industry were initially approved in 2019, but have split the county, with some welcoming the prospect of skilled jobs and others fighting the proposal on environmental grounds.Formal planning consent is yet to be granted, and on 9 February the council announced it would reconsider the initial approval in the light of the recommendations of the government’s Committee for Climate Change on planned cuts to greenhouse gas emissions after 2033.The rethink came amid reports that that the UK president of November’s United Nations Cop26 climate change summit in Glasgow, Alok Sharma, was “apoplectic” at cabinet colleague Robert Jenrick’s failure to “call in” the plan.It was welcomed by Labour’s shadow business secretary Ed Miliband, who said: “The UK cannot claim to be a climate leader whilst opening a new coal mine.”The application is likely to be considered at a council planning meeting in April, but a final decision is not expected until after the local council elections in May.Today’s letter to council leader Stewart Young is signed by Cumbria Tory MPs Trudy Harrison (Copeland), Mark Jenkinson (Workington), Simon Fell (Barrow in Furness) and John Stevenson (Carlisle), as well as others from newly-won seats in the north of England and Conservative mayors of Copeland and Tees Valley.They warned the council might be open to legal challenge for taking into account recommendations which have not yet been adopted by the government, and called on Mr Young to publish internal legal and planning advice to show that the decision to reconsider was not “political”.Mr Stevenson described Labour opposition to the plan as “a direct attack on industry and job creation”, denying Cumbria of more than 500 well-paid jobs at the mine and 2,000 more in the supply chain.And Mr Fell said: “Steel underpins every single renewable technology that we need to employ to hit our net zero target and we cannot make that steel without coking coal. “The choice we face is whether to offshore the carbon debt of mining coking coal to countries like Russia and accept the huge environmental and humanitarian cost of doing so, or to allow this mine to proceed and wrap our own high environmental standards around it. “We simply can’t pretend that this is all someone else’s problem and pat ourselves on the back for hitting net zero 2050 while outsourcing the problem elsewhere. By opposing it, Labour is showing once again that they are out of touch with working class communities in the north of England.” But Ms Powell said: “Not for the first time, Tory MPs are trying to con people with a false promise. “The Cumbria coal mine is not an answer to the issues facing our steel industry. Eighty-five per cent of its production is due for export, and this plant will not address the financial challenges facing the industry going forward or provide it with a long-term future.“We won’t take lectures from the Conservative Party about standing up for UK steel making and the communities which support it, as they’ve failed to tackle the issue of high energy prices steelmakers are facing.“We need investment to help the steel industry to get through the worst economic crisis of any major economy, safeguard primary steel-making, and support the transition to a decarbonised future, protecting jobs and livelihoods. “That’s why Labour has called for a £30bn green recovery to turbocharge our economic recovery and deliver a secure, long-term future for our steel industry.”Friends of the Earth climate campaigner Tony Bosworth said the letter’s signatories “should be listening to climate experts about this mine”.Mr Bosworth said: “Last month the government’s official climate advisers warned that a new mine in Cumbria would increase global emissions and have a negative impact on the UK’s legally binding carbon budgets. “It will also put a massive dent in the UK government’s credibility ahead of crucial climate talks in Glasgow later this year.“West Cumbria, like other parts of the country, desperately needs new jobs – but these should be green jobs created by investing in a cleaner, safer economy, rather than extracting more fossil fuels that help accelerate the climate crisis.”Cumbria County Council declined to comment on the letter. More

A veil of secrecy could be drawn over government failures on the environment and climate goals because of new restrictions set to be made law in Boris Johnson’s environment bill.Campaigners have sounded the alarm over a “secrecy clause” in the bill that will prohibit the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) from revealing evidence and key discussions with the government and other public bodies.The watchdog is being established by ministers to carry out oversight previously the responsibility EU agencies before Brexit, and will be tasked with holding the government to laws on tackling pollution, meeting climate goals, and conserving the environment.But under paragraph 42 of the bill the office will be banned from revealing any information provided to it by public authorities, including the government  – and will not be allowed to reveal correspondence with ministers without their say-so.Other information like unpublished specifics on whether the government and public authorities are meeting their climate crisis goals could also be kept from public view.The government says the secrecy clause is necessary to provide a “safe space for dialogue” with the watchdog, but freedom of information campaigners say the law will destroy public transparency on environmental decisions.The prohibition also appears to interfere with the longstanding Environmental Information Regulations (EIR), which give every citizen freedom of information-like powers to access information and documents relating to the environment.Despite the bill having a list of exemptions to the disclosure prohibition, none of them protect the EIR freedom of information rules, though the government claims they will not be affected.But Maurice Frankel, director of the Campaign for Freedom of Information, told The Independent: “The bill either prohibits disclosure of information by the OEP or increases the chances of it being withheld under an expanded exemption, or both.“At first sight it’s not clear why new restrictions should be needed, given that the Environmental Information Regulations already allow information to be withheld if disclosure would be harmful and not in the public interest. “The answer may be to protect ministerial lobbying. The OEP may need to take enforcement action against ministers if they fail to comply with environmental legislation. Even when it acts against other authorities it must keep ministers informed.
Ministers will be able to intervene in secret, pressing the OEP to tone down, delay or drop any action, interfering with what is meant to be an independent regulatorMaurice Frankel, director, Campaign for Freedom of Information”Where there are major implications for government expenditure or projects ministers will be able to intervene in secret, pressing the OEP to tone down, delay or drop any action, interfering with what is meant to be an independent regulator.“The government should scrap the proposed prohibition on disclosure which fundamentally undermines the public’s rights under the EIR,  and contravenes the Aarhus Convention to which the UK is a signatory.”In 2019 the bill, which is currently in its report stage in parliament, was criticised by 40 leading environmental and transparency organisations for its secrecy clause. Groups including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the National Union of Journalists and the Open Rights Group warned that the approach amounted to a “damaging and unjustified restriction on the public’s right to environmental information”.
UK news in picturesShow all 50 More

A senior government minister has admitted that the UK is sending out a “mixed message” by giving the go-ahead to a new coal mine at the same time it is asking other countries to commit to reductions in carbon emissions.Ministers have faced criticism for not “calling in” the decision to green-light the scheme in Whitehaven, Cumbria, which is now being reviewed by the local county council.The move came months ahead of November’s United Nations COP26 summit in Glasgow, at which countries will be asked to improve on carbon reduction promises made in the Paris Agreement of 2015.Speaking to the Institute for Government think tank, Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng admitted the arguments were “finely balanced”, but said that producing coking coal in Cumbria could actually cut overall emissions by removing the need for the UK steel industry to transport imported fuel from distant countries.Mr Kwarteng said: “I think it was a difficult issue. I fully understand that it’s a slightly mixed message to some people. “But at the same time we are committed to the steel industry.“The view was that it was a local decision, so it was the local council that decided to give the go-ahead to the coal mine.“The secretary of state didn’t overrule them in the interests of local power, local devolution.”He said that opening a new mine in Britain “made more sense” than importing coal from abroad.“I think it was a finely-balanced argument in terms of the fact that if you don’t produce coking coal and you have blast furnace steel, which we have, they are going to end up importing the coking coal anyway,” said Mr Kwarteng.“In terms of the global reduction of emissions it doesn’t actually make an effect, it actually increases it because you’re essentially shutting down a domestic source of coking coal and importing it from halfway round the world.”Asked whether Boris Johnson accepted that mixed signals had been sent, the prime minister’s official spokesman said: “The Cumbria coal mine is a planning application, which is a matter for Cumbria County Council. It is right that they take the decision on it.”The spokesman said that Mr Johnson had made his commitment to addressing climate change clear on numerous occasions, adding: “I would point to the Environment Bill and the recent conversation he had with President Biden, where the prime minister discussed climate change, as well as the 10-point plan we have set out on this issue.“The prime minister is fully committed to addressing climate change.”Plans for the UK’s first deep coal mine in 30 years were initially approved by Cumbria councillors in 2019 and environmentalists have said that local government secretary Robert Jenrick’s decision not to call the decision in “drove a coach and horses” through the government’s climate position. More

A controversial new coal mine planned for Cumbria is struggling for national support, with a new poll showing Britons want ministers to block it on climate grounds.The West Cumbria Mining proposal near Whitehaven would be the first deep coal mine in the UK for 30 years, with supporters saying it would create thousands of jobs.But activists warn it would be detrimental to the environment and Britain’s climate goals, as the UK prepares to host the Cop26 summit in Glasgow in November.A survey by YouGov found 47 per cent of people think the mine will have a negative impact on the UK – with just 9 per cent believing it will be positive.Ministers say the go-ahead of the mine is a local issue and are refusing to step in and overrule Cumbria County Council, which gave it the green light last year.John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, which commissioned the polling, said: “Greenlighting the UK’s first new deep coal mine in 30 years is the last thing you’d expect from the host government of the next major climate summit. “It’s like giving a tax break to Big Tobacco before hosting a global public health conference. ‘Do as we say not as we do’ can’t be the government slogan for the Glasgow summit. Britain really does need to lead by example or it won’t lead at all. “Ministers are still in time to call in the decision and block the mine before it buries the government’s climate credentials under a tonne of coal.”According to YouGov’s poll, 36 per cent of people are opposed to construction while just 24 per cent who support it. Additionally, a complete blanket ban on the construction of new coal mines has support from 33 per cent of voters, with while 25 per cent are against.
Ministers are still in time to call in the decision and block the mine before it buries the government’s climate credentials under a tonne of coal.John Sauven, GreenpeaceDefenders of the mine say its coal will be used exclusively for coking in the production of steel rather than power generation, and that alternative technologies are not yet mature enough.They argue that the mine will provide jobs locally and that coal will have to be imported to produce steel anyway for some time to come.Phil MacDonald, lead UK analyst at the clean energy think-tank Ember, told The Independent: “A new coal mine in the UK won’t provide the jobs it promises. The last use for the coal is in steel – but the transition to producing clean steel from hydrogen and renewables has already begun. In Sweden, commercial steel production from renewables is just 5 years away – and the UK won’t be far behind.”The UK can’t meet its climate targets if we keep allowing coal mining – and it sends a terrible signal to the rest of the world just as we are hosting the climate conference in Glasgow this December. The UK government needs to be backing green, stable jobs in renewables in the North West – not short-lived, dangerous jobs.” More