News

Boris Johnson will attempt to shame the rich countries of the world into finally meeting a $100bn (£73bn) pledge made more than a decade ago to help developing nations deal with the climate emergency – telling them they have a “duty” to step up because their wealth is based on generations of “reaping the benefits of untrammelled pollution”.In a meeting also attended by the world’s biggest carbon-emitter China, he will announce that the UK is putting half a billion pounds into assisting poorer countries to wean themselves off coal power and switch to cleaner energy sources.He will put pressure on big business to cut its own emissions, in a meeting with Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, when aides said he will confront the billionaire internet retailer over his company’s responsibility to address issues of climate change and biodiversity.And he will raise global warming in a face-to-face meeting with climate emergency-denying Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, whose complicity with loggers using fire to clear vast tracts of Amazon rainforest has fuelled the crisis.With fewer than 50 days to go to the COP26 climate change summit being hosted by the UK in Glasgow, the prime minister will tell a meeting of world leaders at the United Nations in New York on Monday that developed countries have “collectively failed” to live up to promises first made in 2009 to support poorer nations in cutting their carbon emissions and adapting their economies for a warmer climate.An OECD report last week confirmed that only $79.6bn (£58bn) in climate finance for the developing world was mobilised by richer countries in 2019 – 2 percentage points up from the previous year but still well short of the $100bn target which was due to be reached in 2020.New pledges made by G7 leaders at Mr Johnson’s Cornwall summit in June totalling $4bn a year for adaptation and nature will not be enough to take the rich world over the line.At the end of the UN General Assembly this week the UK will publish the detail of countries’ climate finance commitments to date, and Mr Johnson has asked Germany and Canada to draw up a $100bn Delivery Plan ahead of COP26, to spell out how the climate finance promise will be met through to 2025.Co-chairing Monday’s meeting with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, Mr Johnson will announce that the UK will direct £550m – from a pot of £11.6bn already committed to International climate finance over the next five years – towards supporting developing countries to adopt the policies and technologies needed to end reliance on coal.The failure to accelerate the removal of coal from the world’s energy ecosystem is one of the key obstacles standing in the way of the COP26 goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.Despite pledges to bring its emissions to a peak before 2030 and become carbon-neutral by 2060, China this year announced plans to build 43 new coal-fired power plants and 18 new blast furnaces – equivalent to adding about 1.5 per cent to its greenhouse gas production.On the first day of a three-day trip to the US which also takes in talks with Joe Biden at the White House, Mr Johnson will tell Monday’s meeting: “In coming together to agree the $100bn pledge, the world’s richest countries made an historic commitment to the world’s poorest – we now owe it to them to deliver on that.“Richer nations have reaped the benefits of untrammelled pollution for generations, often at the expense of developing countries. As those countries now try to grow their economies in a clean, green and sustainable way we have a duty to support them in doing so – with our technology, with our expertise and with the money we have promised.”Some £350m of the UK funding announced today will go to the Climate Investment Fund to pilot and scale climate solutions in developing countries, including support for a programme to accelerate closures of coal-fired power stations, repurpose sites for clean energy generation and create green jobs.The cash represents Britain’s contribution to a target agreed at the G7 to provide an extra $2bn to the fund’s new energy programmes.A further £200m will go to UK PACT (Partnering for Accelerated Climate Transition), Britain’s flagship climate technical assistance programme, operating since 2018 to deliver net-zero expertise in 16 countries with high or rapidly-growing emissions.Following meetings in New York on Monday, Mr Johnson travels to Washington for talks with Mr Biden and vice-president Kamala Harris, which are certain to feature the ignomious withdrawal from Afghanistan and the UK”s involvement with the US and Australia in a new Indo-Pacifice defence partnership.On Wednesday, he returns to New York for meetings with senior Congress members including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and ranking Republicans Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy.He delivers his own address to the general assembly on Wednesday evening before returning to the UK. More

A House of Lords committee has been criticised for inviting a “fringe” group which campaigns against climate action to give evidence on carbon policy.The Global Warming Policy Foundation was invited by peers to give evidence to an inquiry on reaching net zero and appeared before them on Tuesday.But environmental groups questioned why the committee would “waste their valuable time” hearing from the organisation, which they said had been “so widely and repeatedly found to be wrong”.The GWPF has previously been admonished by the Charity Committee for breaking rules on impartiality and has been described as the country’s most prominent source of climate-change denial. The organisation falsely claims that there is no scientific consensus on climate change, describing the facts as “contested”. It campaigns against renewable energy and says it is “deeply concerned about the costs” of climate action.It says it does not officially take a view on climate climate science and that its members “cover a broad range of different views, from the IPCC position through agnosticism to outright scepticism”.The House of Lords industry and regulators committee invited John Constable, the organisation’s energy editor, to give evidence on net zero and the energy market at a session on Tuesday afternoon.Mr Constable, who has claimed environmentalism is “in a state of physical and moral collapse”, argues against wind power because he says it is not “affordable and proportional to the risk” from climate change.The GWPF does not disclose its funders but says it is “overwhelmingly by voluntary donations from a number of private individuals and charitable trusts”. It says it rejects donations from the energy industry, though it is not possible to verify this. Mr Constable told the peers on Tuesday: “In our view the climate policies don’t pass any of these tests… the abatement cost is extremely high in relation to the threat as far as we understand it, and they are unaffordable in themselves and therefore unlikely to be sustainable in the long term.”Rebecca Newsom, head of politics at Greenpeace UK said: “From the plummeting cost of renewables to the science behind the climate crises, the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s views have been so widely and repeatedly found to be wrong that you really have to question why the Lords would waste their valuable time on them. “It’s an organisation on the far fringes, who have nothing constructive to say to today’s young people worried about the climate crisis and do very little but attempt to derail much needed action. “Parliament voted unanimously for our net zero target two years ago, and there are a huge array of voices who might provide the Lords with more worthwhile guidance on how we meet the challenge.”A spokesperson for the committee said: “The Committee are looking at a number of policy and regulatory impacts of the move to net zero. To do that effectively it will take evidence from witnesses with a broad range of views. The Committee will weigh up all the evidence it receives before making any recommendations.”The UN climate watchdog the IPCC last month issued a “code red” warning demanding immediate climate action. Global surface temperatures are over 1 C higher between 2011-2020 the between 1850 and 1900, while the past five years have been the hottest on record since 1850. The recent rate of sea level rise has nearly tripled compared to 1901 – 1971 and is is “virtually certain” that hot extremes including heatwaves have been more intensive since the 1950s. More

The British government secretly dropped a series of climate pledges in order to secure a post-Brexit trade deal with Australia, leaked emails appear to show.Liz Truss, the trade secretary, and Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, decided to “drop both of the climate asks” from the text of the UK-Australia agreement in order to get it “over the line”, according to the email from a senior official.A binding section that referenced the “Paris Agreement temperature goals” was scrubbed from the accord after pressure from the southern Hemipshere country’s government – which has a notoriously weak record on climate action. The embarrassing revelation comes just weeks before the government is due to host a landmark UN climate conference, COP26, in Glasgow – where it is supposed to ask countries to make stronger commitments to cutting emissions. Just last month Boris Johnson claimed any trade deal with Australia would, “include a chapter on trade and environment which not only reaffirms commitments to multilateral environmental agreements, including the Paris Agreement but also commits both parties to collaborate on climate and environmental issues”.The prime minister claimed that “more trade will not come at the expense of the environment”. In June the two countries reached an “agreement in principle” to cut tariffs and quotas.John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said the government’s actions would signal the start of a “race to the bottom” and accused Boris Johnson of having lied about the issue. “The UK government pledged to embed the environment at the very heart of trade, including supporting the Paris Agreement on climate and zero deforestation in supply chains,” Mr Sauven said.“Signing an Australian trade deal with action on climate temperature commitments secretly removed is the polar opposite of everything Boris Johnson publicly pledged and rips the heart out of what the agreement stands for.”The Greenpeace chief added: “It will be a race to the bottom, impacting on clean tech sectors and farmers’ livelihoods. There should be a moratorium on trade deals with countries like Australia until they improve on their weak climate targets and end deforestation. At the moment the public and parliament are being duped by the Prime Minister into thinking this deal is great for Britain when in reality nothing could be further from the truth.“What’s also clear is that the government’s promise of public consultation and updates on the progress of the negotiations are completely inadequate. It’s time parliament demanded proper scrutiny for trade deals.”Brexiteers in the government like trade secretary Ms Truss have been desparate to secure trade deals with other countries to try and prove that leaving the EU has benefits. But experts say the drive for agreements at any cost has put the UK in a weak negotiating position.The email, first reported by Sky News, was sent last month and details internal discussions between Ms Truss, Mr Kwarteng and Brexit minister Lord Frost It originates from a deputy director in the government’s the trade secretariat, which is part of the Cabinet Office.The email says: “As flagged in my note to Lord Frost, the Business and Trade Secretaries were due to speak yesterday. “We haven’t yet seen the formal read out, but we understand the conversation took place and the Business Secretary has agreed that, in order to get the Australia FTA over the line, DIT can drop both of the climate asks (ie on precedence of Multilateral Environmental Agreements over FTA provisions and a reference to Paris Agreement temperature goals.)”The change makes the deal weaker than the Brexit agreement with the EU and other FTAs negotiated by the UK. The Paris deal requires countries to set goals in order to limit global warming to well below 2C, preferably to 1.5C. Australia’s prime minister Scott Morrison has refused to commit to taking his country to net zero by 2050, even after the UN’s most recent “code red” warning. Instead, Australia’s government is holding to an existing pledge of cutting carbon emissions by 26 per cent to 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. Australia is the second-largest exporter of coal in the world and has a high per capita carbon footprint, according to European Commission data. Of 176 new coal projects across the world, 79 of them are in Australia, according to Fitch.Caroline Lucas, member of the cross-party UK Trade and Business Commission and a Green Party MP said: “Weeks before the UK is due to host an international summit to secure climate action, this revelation paints a bleak picture of both the government’s priorities and their abysmal negotiating power post-Brexit.”Only yesterday, the government showed they are willing to break any promise they make to the public and their readiness to compromise on the existential challenge of our time raises serious concerns on what else might be on the table in ongoing trade negotiations.”Jean Blaylock, a trade campaigner at the group Global Justice Now, said the episode was “typical of the government’s approach to trade deals”. “Climate commitments will always come second to a free trade arrangement, regardless of the consequences for the planet,” she said. “Even deals that contain specific climate commitments often sign us up to secretive corporate courts that allow big polluters to sue governments for taking climate action.“The kinds of trade deals that we are pursuing are completely incompatible with decarbonisation. Tweaking the text of trade deals is not enough. We need to fundamentally reshape our system of global trade to save us from climate catastrophe.”Ed Miliband, Labour’s shadow business secretary, said: the revelation “underscores yet again that this greenwashing government cannot be trusted on climate”. “With COP26 round the corner, the Government should be flexing every political muscle to ensure the summit is a success,” he said.“Australia is one of the world’s biggest polluters and key to the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. But rather than piling pressure on them, the Government has simply rolled over.“This government is pursuing trade deals at the expense of our farmers and now our climate targets. This is simply a massive betrayal of our country and our planet.”A Government spokesperson said: “Our ambitious trade deal with Australia will include a substantive article on climate change which reaffirms both parties’ commitments to The Paris Agreement and achieving its goals, including limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. Any suggestion the deal won’t sign up to these vital commitments is completely untrue.””The UK’s climate change and environment policies are some of the most ambitious in the world, reflecting our commitment as the first major economy to pass new laws for net zero emissions by 2050.” More

Around 800,000 homes have been built to lower emissions standards or without carbon offsets because the government scrapped tough environmental rules six years ago, it can be revealed. Ministers were accused of wasting “years of vital progress” in the fight against the climate emergency, baking in high-carbon housing stock for decades, and driving up energy bills for families.The last Labour government introduced a legal requirement for new homes to be made net zero carbon by 2016, but in 2015 the Conservative government scrapped the plan at the last minute.796,710 new dwellings have been built since then, according to official figures – practically none of them net zero and all expected to last well beyond when the whole economy must hit net zero. It comes amid concern about the influence of property developers on the Conservative party, with the party having taken £891,000 in donations from the sector in the first quarter of 2021 alone. Companies linked to property developers have donated over £10 million to the governing party since the start of 2019 and Labour says Tories have consistently put the interests of donors ahead of the public.Approached about the policy change, the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government said the net zero requirement’s inclusion of “carbon offsetting” as a possible way for homes to hit net zero justified ending the requirement altogether.However, the government could have changed the rules of the schemes to simply not allow carbon offsetting.Offsetting, which involves strategies like planting trees to reduce the net emissions of a project, is also used in other areas of government policy, including as part of the government’s own national net zero emissions target.Labour’s shadow business secretary Ed Miliband said: “The Government’s dither and delay means we’ve lost six years of vital progress in reducing emissions and lowering energy bills. “Sadly this mistake isn’t just a one-off but part of a damaging pattern. Just this year, the Government axed the Green Homes Grant scheme which could have helped households insulate their homes, reduce their emissions, and save money on bills. “800,000 households could have had lower energy bills and zero carbon homes by now if the zero carbon hones standard had not been abolished. Hundreds of thousands more homes will also be built before this standard comes in.”The Conservatives cannot be trusted to deliver, whether it’s on reducing emissions or protecting family finances.”The government has now said it will require homes to be made net zero by 2025, with higher emissions standards phased in. Offsets will also be used as part of the government’s plan to eventually make homes net zero.A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government said: “The Zero Carbon Homes policy involved carbon offsetting, rather than making homes zero carbon, and would have would have provided limited benefits to consumers as it wouldn’t necessarily have increased the efficiency of their homes.“By delivering carbon reductions through the fabric and building services in a home, rather than relying on wider carbon offsetting, the Future Homes Standard ensures new homes will have a smaller carbon footprint than any previous government policy.” More

Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon has called on Boris Johnson to “reassess” plans for the new Cambo oil field near Shetland following an outcry by climate campaigners.In a letter to the prime minister, the SNP leader said the UK government should reconsider drilling licenses for the waters around Shetland where no development had yet taken place.Ms Sturgeon – who has been under intense pressure from the Scottish Green Party and environmental activists on the issues – also asked for a four-nation summit on the climate crisis.“I am also asking that the UK government agrees to reassess licenses already issued, but where field development has not yet commenced. That would include the proposed Cambo development,” she said.The first minister said licenses should be reconsidered because of the urgency of the climate emergency and need to move away from fossil fuels. “We must ensure that the decisions and investments we make now are aligned with that ambition,” she wrote in her letter.But Greenpeace UK slammed her letter as a “PR exercise” – with campaigner Sam Chetan-Walsh saying: “Nicola Sturgeon is deferring to Boris Johnson to check the climate impact of Cambo, but until she makes her own stance clear this is just a PR exercise.”Friends of the Earth also accused Ms Sturgeon of “deferring to Boris Johnson on the future of North Sea oil and gas.”The group’s climate campaigner Caroline Rance said: “She has failed to actually state her government’s opposition to Cambo or any new oil and gas. If the first minister wants to show leadership she must go further than calling on someone else to review their position.” Both the first minister and prime minister have come under fire over plans by Shell and Siccar Point Energy to drill in the Cambo oil field in the face of runaway climate change.At the weekend Ms Sturgeon was cornered by anti-oil campaigners in her Glasgow Southside constituency – but insisted the decision on Cambo lay with the UK government.Challenged on whether she would oppose the oil field in Shetland, Ms Sturgeon said: “Look, I’m not going to stand here … it’s not an issue for the Scottish government. We are thinking about all of these things … There’s no doubt we should be moving away [from oil].”Campaigners at the Green New Deal Rising group also responded with dismay to Ms Sturgeon’s letter on Thursday, saying it was “not enough” to stop the oil field development.Jennifer Kowalski, who had challenged the first minister face-to-face in her constituency, said: “Asking the government to ‘reassess’ is not enough. She needs to stop hiding behind the Conservatives and commit to no new oil fields in Scotland.”Calls to oppose the Cambo development intensified after Monday’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, which painting a stark picture of the impact of humanity on the climate due to the burning of fossil fuels and other pollutants.While not a full-throated opposition to Cambo going ahead, the first minister’s intervention is her first on the issue. It also marks a significant shift away from SNP talk of an oil “bonanza” in Scotland. Ms Sturgeon said Shetland was on the cusp of a “second oil boom” in 2014.Explaining her stance on Thursday, she tweeted: “Oil and gas supports thousands of jobs in Scotland so our transition away from fossil fuels must be a just one. But the climate emergency demands that it happens at pace.”In her letter to Mr Johnson, Ms Sturgeon said: “We are both well aware of the importance of oil and gas over many decades – not least in terms of jobs – to the Scottish and UK economies. However, the answer to these challenges, given the urgency of the climate emergency, cannot be business as usual.”The SNP leader added: “Indeed, I am asking that the UK government now commits to significantly enhancing the climate conditionality associated with offshore oil and gas production.”The proposed Cambo oil field development is estimated to produce 132 million tonnes of carbon during its lifetime – a figure that would need a land mass 1.5 times bigger than Scotland to counter.Last week Mr Johnson claimed that the government “can’t just tear up contracts” as campaigners urged him to block the Cambo project.“This was a contract that was agreed in 2001 and we can’t just tear up contracts,” the prime minister told Sky News. “There’s a process to be gone through.” More

The president of the Cop26 summit Alok Sharma has said the UK is already experiencing the impact of climate change, as a group of Tory MPs shared their concerns about the cost of pursuing green policies.The government minister said he was shocked by recent photographs of the wildfires in Greece – but pointed to last month’s flash flooding in London as an example of extreme weather events in Britain.Mr Sharma told BBC’s Newscast podcast: “Unfortunately it’s not just Greece, we’re seeing around the world. And even in our country, right? In July when I was hosting a meeting of climate ministers here in London, London experienced in 24 hours one month of rainfall.”It comes as Conservative MPs in “red wall” seats across the north of England were caught out complaining to one other about the possible costs involved in cutting carbon emissions.Discussing the government’s green agenda, Tory Ashfield MP Lee Anderson reportedly told a WhatsApp group of Tory MPs: “This will not go down well in Red Wall seats at all.”Mr Sharma has been criticised for refusing to rule out new licences for oil and gas in the North Sea or an underground coal mine in Cumbria.Grilled about the plan for a coal mine near Whitehaven, Mr Sharma told the BBC: “When it comes to this coal mine I’m pleased there’s going to be a public inquiry. And we’ll see what comes out of it.”He added: “It does get raised by civil society groups when I talk to them. And I explain to them there is no coal mine – there’s going to be a public inquiry about this. There isn’t one at the moment, that’s the point.”The Cop26 minister has also come under fire over the number of flights he has taken around the world since the new year, but environmentalists have defended his attempts to hold face to face talks with leaders.Defending plane travel for the purpose of forging vital international agreement, Mr Sharma said it was particularly important for developing nation delegates to take part in talks “face-to-face” at Cop26 in Glasgow this November.“Everyone has been invited and we hope as many world leaders as possible come to this,” said the conference president. “The best way of getting this done is doing it face to face.“It’s really important that developing nations are able to sit at the same table as the big economies, the big nations, look them in the eye, face to face, and have this negotiation.”Mr Sharma said he expected more countries to submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) – their own national climate action plans – before the Cop26 summit begins, urging major polluters like China and India to come up with new targets.“At the current count around 112 have submitted their NDCs,” he said. “What we need of course is all the big economies to come forward. We want to see what China’s going to do. We want to see what India is going to do.”“We’re also trying to get countries to commit to going to net zero in their economies by the middle of the century,” Mr Sharma added.The UK government said earlier this week it would relax some travel restrictions to help delegates attend the climate conference, including a shorter quarantine period for those from so-called “red list” countries who have been vaccinated. More

The government could be about to significantly curb the scope of a scheme that pays consumers to return drinks bottles and cans for recycling, green experts are warning.A coalition of environmental charities says ministers could be about to make a “costly and misguided mistake” that will allow plastic to continue to pollute the countryside and seas, devastating wildlife.The start date of a planned deposit return scheme has been put back a year from 2023 to 2024.And one option being “seriously” considered is restricting the scheme to drink containers under 750ml in size and excluding those sold in multipacks.The Wildlife and Countryside Link, a coalition whose members include Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and WWF, warns in a report today against the moves.Under a deposit return scheme, the price of drinks in bottles or aluminium cans includes a small amount that goes towards recycling. The sum is returned to the buyer as an incentive to recycle when the empty container is returned.In its election manifesto, the government promised a scheme this Parliament, with an original start date of 2023, but a government consultation document earlier this year said the coronavirus had forced a delay in rolling it out.The consultation also considers restricting the scheme to smaller “on-the-go” containers rather than a wider “all-in” arrangement.Paula Chin, chairwoman of the coalition’s resources and waste group, said: “The evidence is clear that an ‘all-in’ deposit return scheme will provide a huge boost to the environment, helping make our streets, parks and natural spaces cleaner and healthier.“The government’s own figures show that there’s over £5bn in benefits by introducing this scheme in full.“However, ministers are currently weighing up whether to back a watered-down proposal which would cover just a third of drinks containers placed on the market and which may possibly exclude glass containers.”“As we face the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, it’s essential that the government back the strongest possible scheme for tackling litter without delay.”In a first official consultation in 2019, public backing for a deposit return scheme was high, but held a fresh one because of the pandemic.A decision on that is imminent, and the coalition says it understands there is a “strong possibility” the watered-down option will be adopted.A scheme covering all types of containers is predicted to lead to 23.7 billion being recycled each year, against only 7.4 billion under the scaled-down option.The Link coalition says an “all-in” scheme has been judged to have benefits of £11bn against only £3.5bn for an “on-the-go” model – calculated from reduced litter, carbon dioxide savings and the value of recovered materials.The Link members also point out that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have already indicated their support for the “all-in” model, with Scotland set to introduce their scheme next year, ahead of the rest of the UK.“The Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted the economy and society in unimaginable ways, with many people reassessing their values, decisions and priorities,” the government document said.Lockdown has led to unprecedented levels of litter, evidence has suggested.Of the 13 billion plastic drinks bottles sold each year, less than half are recycled, and around 700,000 are dropped into the environment every day.Countries already operating deposit return schemes, such as Germany, have plastic bottle recycling rates of over 90 per cent, against 59 per cent in the UK.The government has set a target of eliminating all ‘avoidable’ plastic waste by 2042, with measures including a plastic packaging tax.In 2019, Greenpeace created a giant bottle out of plastic bottles, delivering it to the government in an effort to persuade ministers to introduce a bottle return scheme.The Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee last month launched an inquiry into plastic waste, sayig just a third of the five million tonnes of plastic used in the UK is recycled.Plastics that are not recycled are exported abroad, where some has been found being burnt or dumped, polluting waterways, not recycled.The Independent has asked the government to respond to the report. More

Labour is demanding an apology from Boris Johnson after he said Britain owed its escape from reliance on coal energy to Margaret Thatcher’s closure of the mines in the 1980s.The prime minister was reported to have chuckled as he made the comment about his Tory predecessor’s wholesale closure of pits, which led to the bitterly divisive miners’ strike of 1984-85.Speaking during a visit to a wind-farm off the coast of Scotland, Mr Johnson said that the UK’s dependence on coal for its electricity had fallen from 70-80 per cent in his childhood to less than one per cent now largely “thanks to” Lady Thatcher.“We’ve transitioned away from coal in my lifetime,” he said. “Thanks to Margaret Thatcher, who closed so many coal mines across the country, we had a big early start and we’re now moving rapidly away from coal altogether.”Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy called on the PM to apologise.“These are shameful comments from the prime minister, and reveal the Conservative party’s utter disregard for the communities still scarred by Thatcher’s closure of the mines and failure to deliver good new jobs in their place,” she said.“Without investment in good, green jobs as we move away from fossil fuels, the Conservatives risk repeating the mistakes of the past. It is vital that the green transition is a fair transition.“The prime minister should apologise.”Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon also condemned the comments.“Lives and communities in Scotland were utterly devastated by Thatcher’s destruction of the coal industry which had zero to do with any concern she had for the planet,” she tweeted.“To treat that as something to laugh about is crass and deeply insensitive.” More