As the Guardian has noted:
Rishi Sunak is planning to row back on some of the government's net zero policies that impose a direct cost on consumers as the Conservatives attempt to create a dividing line with Labour before the next election.
The Guardian understands that the move, expected to be announced in a major speech this Friday, could include delaying a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and watering down the phasing out of gas boilers.
The prime minister is also expected to drop plans for new energy-efficiency targets for private rented homes after ministers considered imposing fines on landlords who failed to upgrade their properties.
The details of what is planned are not known precisely as yet, but it is likely that commitments on phasing out fossil fuel-powered cars and gas boilers, and to changing tax on air travel, as well as other straightforward mechanisms that might reduce carbon output, will all be watered down. Bizarrely, despite this, it is claimed that the commitment to net-zero in 2050 will remain intact when it is already obvious that the chance of achieving this is very limited.
Deep down, I suspect that I always expected this to happen. The chance that Tory politicians would, when faced with a short-term economic crisis, retain their commitment to what is necessary for the long-term good was always going to be remote.
Let me also be honest and suggest that it is Labour's failure to commit to its own £28 billion a year investment programme for a green transition that has given the Tories the opportunity to water down their own commitments. It is as if the two parties were coordinating their activities so that they might, in combination, maintain the current unsustainable status quo. Their common premise is that we cannot afford to survive.
Why are they doing this? The answer is quite straightforward. Most of those who have influence in and on these parties are in the second half of their lives. They don't only suffer the problem of imagining anything very different to their comfortable lives to date. They also take the conceited view that climate change will not impact them and is a problem for someone else, which is the perpetual neo-liberal politician's excuse for inaction. That the someone else in question will be their children, if they have them, seems to be something they cannot comprehend.
That is because we are living with a generation of politicians, political advisors, journalists, and others with influence for whom nothing has ever really gone wrong. The boomers, or at least those at the top of the boomer pile, have lived lives that were predicted by Harold Macmillan: they have never had it so good. To imagine that this might have negative consequences, or that it might even end, is something that they cannot do. The result is their weak commitment to change, as will be evidenced by Sunak in the speech that he will be making, whenever it happens.
As I see it, there is only one answer to this problem, and that is for younger people to make their opinions clear. They are not only the people now paying the cost of boomers having it so good. They are also the people who will be around to face most of the impact of climate change and its consequences. It is time for them to shout, very loudly, and to demand the changes that we need.
I am aware that this is a big ask when that same generation is also facing most of the burden of the current economic crisis, as they are. Unfortunately, I do not have an alternative.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Your post raises an important moral question for those that have caused the climate disaster. They are, mostly, the post war generation (1945 through to circa 1970). They enjoyed a vast increase in material comfort, foreign travel etc etc & voted en-mass for Thatcher. They contribute to the housing shortage via a combo of holiday homes and buy to let but at the same time whine about the NHS (having voted for its destruction). I could go on at length but you get the idea.
There is some talk about lowering the voting age to 16. Personally (& speaking as a 67 year old) I’d be in favour removing the franchise from those above 65 on the basis that it is clear, at least for much of the current generation, that they are selfish, short sighted and plain mean. They abrogated their right to vote through their actions from 1979 onwards. Obviously it won’t happen. However, if I was a young person, now, I would look at the older “me me me me” generation with hatred, for what they have done, for what they failed to do and for what they continue to do.
I am not sure about removing the vote, but I agree with your final sentiments
Mike Parr, speak for yourself.
This boomer graduated in Manchester in 1980 – to a North devastated by Thatcher, was unemployed for a year and a half before getting a job (applicant no 634) in a job that paid less than advertised in another dying industry for which I was vastly over qualified. I did what I was told and got on my bike to look for work in Brussels. With no support. On my return I switched industries and was lucky enough to land on my feet in IT, in London. Meanwhile, my other half moved from a low-paying industry into construction – only to find that every time he graduated another crash had set in. We’ve had good patches and could afford to take risks because we don’t have kids and have never moved from our first house. But frankly I’m only well off today because my parents have died and my needs are modest.
I may be better off than most young people will be, but that doesn’t mean I’m pulling up a drawbridge.
And I have never, ever, voted Tory, and never will.
Mike, one in five pensioners live in poverty, according to an Organise email I read today.
I imagine the young people they know will not think of them as the me me me generation, and not want to deny them the vote.
My children and grandchildren have flown abroad a lot more often than I have. Only to be expected as they have Danish and Spanish family, too, but I’ve only flown 4 times in my life.
Splitting the generations is exactly what this government wants. Don’t fall for it.
Only to be expected from a party whose only recent crumb of political comfort came as a result of the hundreds of thousands of pounds they spent on months of open and covert social media “influencing” against clean air, to win the Uxbridge byelection.
Rather like the years before the second world war, give the UK rich a choice between maintaining their own greed-obsessed lifestyles or dealing with a world destroying threat and they will choose greed every time.
At a terrible cost we got away with it in 1939-45. I doubt we will be so lucky this time.
Sunak’s move is shocking but not surprising, as you say, given the ULEZ row and other confected concerns about environmental matters, and given the vested interests seeking to protect their profits via “business as usual”, as the price for providing financial support for Sunak and his party.
Kicking the can down the road is a time honoured practice in politics, and this move will likely reverberate down the political hierarchy to local councils. I am involved with a climate group in Teignbridge, South Devon that was set up to support the district council when it declared a climate emergency in 2019. The council has taken some action to put flesh on the bones of that declaration, initially to decarbonise their buildings, now moving on to do the same for their fleet of vehicles. They are also trying to help residents reduce their carbon footprint, but that is proving a much harder task, as you can imagine.
The Light newspaper gets distributed around here, and meetings are sometimes disrupted by a climate denial group. They object to money being spent on “green crap”, and with councils going bankrupt, no doubt many will think they have a point. Especially as local services get worse and worse.
Of course, with Totnes just down the road, there is also plenty of support for environmental issues. But it’s getting harder to stay positive. If I wasn’t involved and active I would be in despair!
The Chris Packham programme, Is it time to break the law?, to be broadcast tomorrow evening on Channel 4, is more timely than ever!
Thank you, both, and well said.
Mike Parr is not the first elderly person to say that. Some years ago, before the pandemic, my widower neighbour, whose children and grandchildren can’t afford to live around here, true blue Buckinghamshire, and inherit his house, said the same with regard to Brexit.
Richard is spot on to highlight, not just politicians, but their advisors and (client) journalists and others with influence and the comfort they reside in. From 2007 – 16, I worked in regulatory and trade policy and was stunned how incestuous, uninterested and deracinated this ruling caste is.
Sometimes, I read about who the new generation of Tory and Labour wannabe MPs. With the honourable and rare exceptions of Miatta Fahnbulleh and Faiza Shaheen, an even worse bunch await.
For those who want to know more about this state of mind and from a former British diplomat turned academic in France, please have a look at the Aurelien substack
Go easy on the “elderly” bit old chap. This elderly guy can still do 130kms in the Ardennes on a bicycle (not electric) @ an ave speed of 27kph and covering 1500mtrs of ascent. 🙂
On this comment: “From 2007 – 16, I worked in regulatory and trade policy and was stunned how incestuous, uninterested and deracinated this ruling caste is.” my goodness, that sounds like the Brussels village/EU institutions. Outwardly all friendly & cuddly – but dissenting voices, not allowed and often frozen out.
How anyone thinks being in your 60s is elderly now is hard to understand.
Thank you, Mike.
Firstly, I apologise profusely and should have used a better form of words.
With regard to Brussels, I worked there, too. Paris, Frankfurt, Basel, NYC and Washington, too.
These comments apply to Brussels, Paris and Washington, which part explains the rise of the yellow vest movement, election of Trump, rise of Sanders etc. That caste is increasingly transnational. The UK and US led the way in terms of their integration, and neglect of home, but the continentals are catching up.
Thank you, Richard. You are correct.
Firstly, I apologise profusely and should have used a better form of words.
Colonel Smithers – no need to apologise – it made me smile & I have a skin like a rhino.
100% agree with your comments re the transnational caste and the transnational reaction to it. That said, I am fortunate to collaborate with some (within the institutions) that recognise the problem & try to make a difference.
Anyway – thanks for livening up my day – something to tell the missus when she gets back from the DG Translate coal face.
On a related note – I have grey/white hair (quite a bit) the ONLY people to offer me their seat on trams (they assume white hair = age-= infirm) & buses are…. Moslems. I always decline with a big smile and a merci. No one else bother.
Years and years back, I remember Michael Caine saying when he was young something like “60 was some broken down old geezer in the pub in a donkey jacket. But just look at us now; we’re the first ‘young’ old”
and it’s true.
As someone who is even older -77- I give you absolution, Colonel.
They are protesting and being jailed for it.
But so are some boomers, including a 62 year old retired GP from Bristol.
Some climate campaigners are being held on remand for up to 6 months before going to court.
There was a 56 year old former teacher from Grantchester who was held for two days in Grays, Essex. Her husband had to put out a missing persons call to find out where she was. If she had been remanded in custody she would still be in prison as her case does not come to court until next month. She has been told by the court last year that she could not take part in any activity until after the case comes to court. She doesn’t need people on here putting her down.
Lots of people in their 60s and 70s care about climate change and can try and do something about it as they have the time.
Chris Packham is 62. Do you think that in 3 years time he should have the vote taken away from him? Do you think he’s not doing enough to warn people?
By the way, the only time I saw him live was at The Sage.
Huh, well vile Starmer has already shown his hostility to “Just Stop Oil” for causing “inconvenience” to gas-guzzling motorists, and has a record of meting out harsh punishments, as for that lad who “looted” a bottle of water in the Croydon riot.
So expect a Starmer government to be even MORE illiberal than a Sunak one, IMO
Frankly, the existing class war is about to turn into a generational war too – and the future of the planet relies on the young working and middle class defeating the old middle and upper class, who have already saddled us with BREXIT and a Tory “landslide” in 2019.
For Jeremy Corbyn, despite the tsunami of lies and smears and negative press, secured 10.3m votes in 2019, 2 million more than Brown in 2010, and 1 million more than Miliband in 2015, and even than Blair in 2005 (who disgracefully won a 60 seat majority on a 22% of the total electorate at 35% x 62% turnout!!, teaching the Tories about electoral bias).
Had only the under 65’s been allowed to vote, Corbyn would probably have won, and stopped the Alice in Wonderland politics in dark mode we’ve experienced since. I mean, what sane society would have allowed Truss to be PM?
Corbyn was about as qualified to become Prime Minister as was Liz Truss.
I did not want Corbyn as PM but your claim is absurd
Does anyone genuinely believe that Corbyn would have been worse than Johnson?
Most of the stuff in Corbyn’s manifesto is what people say they want now, having had four tory PMs since 2015.
Corbyn wanted to bring rail back into public ownership.
Much of Sunak’s speech today was about doing things differently.
This is what happened yesterday. Note Prem Sikka’s statement.
https://leftfootforward.org/2023/09/mick-lynch-slams-new-government-rail-contract-with-avanti-as-a-travesty/
Both ideologues, both supremely unintelligent, both entirely lacking leadership qualities, and both entirely without insight into the concerns of the nass of the electorate other than an narrow band of , well, ideologues.
I think your time here is over
I don’t see many signs of the young acting in a way that is avoids CO2 more than the older generation. Interesting Spanish research https://theplanetapp.com/carbon-footprint-and-age/?lang=en The biggest CO2 emitters being from the ages of 45 to 65, I guess when they have generally a higher income and less spending on house, children etc . Our only hope to avoid 3 or 4 degree increase in temperature by end of century seems to be that low carbon technology will win over fossil fuel driven technology economically which if not government backed will be a much slower process than need be. Hopefully Europe and the US will maintain their drive to increase renewables but Trump may well destroy that hope.
I’m extremely angry about this – using a perfectly rational policy in this way to divide people – it’s lower than the lowest you can go don’t you think?
If people fall for this then maybe as a species we will get what we deserve?
Is this why there is no PMQs today? Sunak daren’t face MPs of any party?
They are all on holiday again….
Sunak isn’t on holiday. He’s giving a speech today at 4.30.
Resignation speech?
Parliament is on holiday
Well, not going too well for Rishi so far.
Ford and Vauxhall slam Rishi Sunak for plan to delay 2030 UK ban on petrol and diesel cars
UK car industry condemns the Prime Minister’s proposals to push back ban to 2035, warning British motoring sector could lose billions of pounds in investment and face thousands of job losses
https://inews.co.uk/news/ford-rishi-sunak-plan-delay-2023-uk-ban-new-petrol-diesel-cars-2629236?ico=related_stories
Tories doing a cracking job at offending everyone except the fossil fuel lobby and climate deniers.
Sunak is failing the country…..
Climate change is just one of the many ‘planetary boundary’ threats [1,2]. Of course the opportunistic Tories are searching for votes amongst those aggrieved, perhaps by ‘expert’ views. Tory leaders seem uninterested in keeping our planet healthy (alive). It’s easier for them to promotion false counter arguments than support laborious scientific discovery and investigations.
What are the Tories (and Labour) doing! We are running out of time, resources and space.
Last week I sat through a talk on PFASs (perfluoroalkyl substances), fabulous compounds which give us non-stick cookware, rainproof clothes and shoes, cosmetics etc etc. There are thousands of different types of these – BUT PFASs don’t break down in nature they bioaccumulate and have already passed (or close to passing) [3] a new planetary boundary i.e. Earth can’t take umpteen more perfluoro-stuff. Many are toxic, possibly also cytogenetic (I asked if they had been tested for gene toxicity, some may have, but thousands not). In many parts of the world drinking water already contains concentrations 100x more than safe drinking water guidelines.
Plastics and associated chemical products must be phased out where not essential. [4]
“Ecocide needs to be designated as the world’s fifth atrocity crime, with the same moral power and legal impact as genocide and crimes against humanity.” [5,6]
[1] DOI: 10.1126/science.125985
[2] https://news.mongabay.com/2021/03/the-nine-boundaries-humanity-must-respect-to-keep-the-planet-habitable/
[3] Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 56, 11172−11179 (This article has been viewed in the scientific literature 250,000 times in the last year).
[4] https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvaud/179/179.pdf
[5] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/22/five-legal-ideas-fight-climate-crisis-save-planet
[6] https://www.stopecocide.earth
Agreed
And thanks
Yet another reason to stick two fingers up at the political establishment and vote Green.
It’s been suggested that this is Sunak’s bright green moment by Fraser Nelson in the Spectator. That might upset people in the Bright Green movement, such as Chris Jarvis, of Left Foot Forward, and Caroline Lucas.
Vote Green and you will not get rid of the Tories. I would vote Green, but I want to be rid of the Tories, so………
Mike G
Starmer is a Tory. As a wise man once said voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.
I actually want to deny Starmer a majority. I think a hung parliament or a small labour majority is the best outcome for the country. Starmer with absolute power is a terrifying prospect.
I guess there are other voting options depending on where you live. In Scotland the SNP. If I was lucky enough to have a Dan Carden, Clive Lewis or Zarah Sultana I would vote Labour, but I don’t, so I won’t.
Do you know anything about your Labour candidate, do you trust them? I think these things are important to consider before you put an X in the box.
Only in constituencies where there is already a labour MP, or labour are the clear choice to unseat a tory Mike. That’s not the case in Scotland where the SNP are the anti tory candidates, it is mostly the choice in Wales (though Plaid Cymru are also beginning to count there), and although it’s the case in a majority of English constituencies, there are a significant number, at a rough guess anything from 40 to 60, where an anti tory vote should go to the LD’s.
And the greens have a good chance in 3 or 4 constituencies I should think.
But for an anti tory campaign to work, it needs the anti tory parties to work together to stop splitting the anti tory vote. And labour, although they have the responsibility as the largest anti tory party, refuse to do that.
In my constituency, I have no idea whether the LD’s or labour are best placed to kick out the tories. Historically, it’s been a safe tory seat god help me, although new labour held it from 1997 to 2005. This GE the sitting tory MP is standing down, and with the mess his abysmal party have made of things, I would have thought this would be as good a time as any to elect a non tory.
So now is the time for the non tory parties to get together and decide who is best placed to oppose the tories. But of course, no sign of that at all. So I’ll be voting green. You want people to vote labour Mike, despite everything? Then get your sodding party to promote tactical voting instead of threatening to expel party members who are willing to look beyond narrow party interest and have promoted it.
If the LDs are the alternative they seem pretty good at advertising the fact, it seems to me. Outside cities in southern England they almost invariably are. Elsewhere that is unlikely.
Richard,
The young do not vote in enough numbers, or systematically to make a difference. Voting at sixteen would help (it applies in Scotland since 2016); but in Scotland marriage at sixteen was the lowest age (only from the 1929 Act. Scotland followed Roman Law, with an even lower age in theory, but the 1929 Act appears to have formalised what was already accepted cultural practice – established over centuries). People could work at sixteen, and pay taxes. There is no justification therefore, not to give votes at sixteen. The advantage is that such progressive moves helps to teach citizenship, and politics as part of citizenship. The problem is citizenship is not part of the school curriculum (then we could include accounting, and even science could add a practical, problem solving dimension; encouraging real thought, imagination and expression).
It will never happen because political parties require mindless tribalism and deep ignorance of constructive citizenship to survive. This is one reason I believe independence for Scotland is necessary. I do not believe England is now ready for such a progressive step(or perhaps ever will be?); but I do think Scotland can just about do it – it is buried deep in albeit in mangled form, deep in the culture, if we can dig out the best of it.
The standard argument against votes at sixteen in England is lack of ‘maturity’. Boris Johnson is ‘mature’. The Conservative members voting for Liz Truss were mature? The Brexit voting public was mature? The political party tribalism is mature? This is a rich menu, and I could fill it with endless content. Our whole system is immature; and if nothing is done it will send us to perdition..
It’s no surprise a party of landlords would be against imposing fines on landlords.
The Chris Packham programme “Is it Time to Break the Law” is on tonight, Wednesday, not tommorrow – Channel 4 at 9pm
Thanks
I have to say I think we should all protest because in one way or another we’ll all be impacted.
There are many issues that make it hard for the young to protest, not least the pressure that many of them are under – my daughter for example, who is 30 and in her 2nd year as a junior doctor is very aware, socially and politically, but can’t afford to be arrested as a conviction would risk her losing her career. It’s a stressful and demanding job which leaves little time or mental bandwidth for the action that’s needed. Also there is just so much that is totally s**t at the moment she has, to some extent stopped engaging with the news about everything from Brexit to climate breakdown in order to prevent herself sinking into despair. I don’t think this is uncommon especially as when you’re starting out in life you need to retain some sense of positvity and a sense of the good things in life in spite of everything. For those less well educated and informed I’m sure life is even more of a struggle and they are at the mercy of our very biased media.
I myself feel rather lost about which way to turn when things are falling apart on so many fronts and I don’t have a specific area of focus and expertise as you do, and many others who comment here. However, being in my late sixties, I do have more time than when I was younger, working full time and parenting.
My suggestion? Just talk about your concerns.
I do….at length!! I also recommend this blog to everyone I talk to, as in the end it is all about the money and fighting vested interests. I do what I can in a few areas but it never seems enough….. but I will still do it!
Thanks!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chJLgMOtu8Y
This is one of the things I do. I follow weownit, subsidise them when I can.
Tomorrow at 5pm is their first youtube to the public and it’s about Manchester taking buses back under their control. Lots of other places are halfway to doing it, but weownit got together with Andy Burnham.
They campaign for lots of other things too, to take back railways, water, energy and save the NHS.
Thank you Jenw, and yes, I’m aware and get their notifications…definitely a good thing!