On Monday, Trump announced that he was abandoning the Green New Deal. He has now cancelled nearly $300bn of planned US green spending, including support for onshore and offshore wind. He would rather burn carbon.
The same attitude is being seen here in the UK. As Bloomberg has reported:
Keir Starmer's government is preparing to approve controversial expansions to three London airports as part of a push to spur growth that's become more urgent this month after international markets cast doubt on the credibility of the UK's economic plans.
Ministers are set to publicly signal support for a long-sought third runway at Heathrow, sign off on plans to bring the second strip at Gatwick into full-time use, and allow an increase in the capacity at Luton Airport, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked for anonymity discussing plans that haven't been finalized.
The Tories hesitated on this issue, knowing that there is no way in which promoting more airport use - which is solely for the purpose of encouraging overseas holidays and which might very well be bad for UK tourism as a result - was consistent with our legally binding objective of net-zero by 2050.
If we are to achieve that essential goal, the last thing we need is more airport capacity. But that is what Labour is offering.
It would seem as though the race to burn the planet is on.
I despair.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
[…] have already noted Labour's desire to outdo Trump on green policy this morning. Now, it seems that they are trying to do the same on consumer […]
Another headline today ” Labour curbs environmental quangos to get Britain building”.
Perhaps the UK government believes joining the Trump race to the bottom will impress him and soften the bullying?
Building houses that are over priced, and rush built is not going to be a sustainable growth recipe.
More madness
I agree.
It chimes with Labour’s wholesale adoption of May and Johnson’s “Global Britain” bulls**it (see Jonathan Reynolds), so that Britain is a ‘global aviation hub’ (though now that would probably be Dubai and Doha). It is utter nonsense.
Steve Richards (Rock & Roll Politics podcast) – by no means a Starmer or Blairite, but is measured and fair, and on the left of politics – is beginning to despair at the timidity of Labour, especially in public spending, and the timidity bordering on doing nothing on getting closer to the EU – when Labour has such a large majority. Steve Richards says that: “a large majority gives you the space to do things”. Labour are not.
Depressing times.
It is really pathetic that we seem only capable of exploiting what there is, and not creating more of the new.
We are avoiding the risk of the new and at the same time increasing the known risks we face.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is stupidity on a grand scale and is worthy of dissent.
I understand everyone’s sense of despair about the news from the Us, but frnakly I think it misses the crucial point; and what we need to learn.
What I wish to focus on is not much discussed; Trump’s presidential profile is unique; two terms, with a four year sabbatical between. I am not focusing on content; I am focussing on what he has learned. He has learned how US Government works. He has learned how modern political ‘comms’., and how to use use social media – from the big operators, who understand how it works. He has learned how to do a revolutionary transformation in Government, and keep it in the public eye. He has learned how to exploit approval/
He has learned how to govern the first 100 days in the 21st century. He has turned Roosevelt’s avuncular fireside chats into a TV spectacle. He has brought the formation and act of policy to the masses. In two days.
Here is the case study. To governments with unprecedented majority wins; and the first 2 days, to compare with the first 100 days. The latter compares very, very badly.
Trump does what he promised, he makes theatre of it. He makes it look like it has happened (and it hasn’t, but he has established he is doing his job – cleverly passing the buck to the implementers; this is social media apotheosised). It is performance art (and not enough time for adverse consequences to upset it, just some awkward questions he can’t answer; but the public like him for brushing the questions off, because he is doing what they voted for). Trump has transformed how Presidential Government is done in the US, forever. This is cutting-edge politics in the 21st century.
Starmer blows it. He spends 100 days breaking every promise, showing he is weak, showing how impossibly difficult everything is; how hard to achieve any noticeable improvement; how helpless he is trying to achieve anything. How much pin has to be suffered by everybody who voted for, to achieve nothing anyone can see. And everyone has time to see how bad the consequences of Starmer’s government for everyone. He has shown that British Government doesn’t work; that democracy is a waste of time.
Thanks
Apologies for the bloopers.
Trump has made his decisions as executive orders; actions. Compare that with Britain. It takes a painful, agonising, drawn-out Budget; or legislation – protracted, probebly badly drafted, and almost cetainlt useless. Or an Enquiry; write off ten years waiting, and then nothing is implemented. Or a Starmer speech about ‘red-lines’; and no action.
There is the difference. Government is not done by Betiain taking the time for caregul thought and implementation; the time is turned into prevarication, delay; and the desire to disarm anything from any argument; and ends doing nothing at all.
That is why we are in our mess; and Trump is celebrating a triumph.
In Britain we need a complete transformation. The Status Quo Ante has to go.
Uh, Trump doesn’t do what he promises. Look at all the promises he backtracked on already.
He is doing enough in the digital, social media age to persuade the voters who voted him into office, that he is doing what he promised; ie., the things they want to hear. He is taking decisions; He is freeing people from prison. It looks as if he will use troops at the border. A lot of the changes in government will happen (executive orders can be challenged in court, but they are within his prerogative). He is taking the action the Trump voter wants; now. He is doing politics differently. He discussed the price of TikTok and the terms of a deal on TV, in language the voter grasps, and it is what they want to hear. The loose ends; the inconsistencies? They don’t care; just a few broken, wasted eggs making the omelette. And unless Trump can change the rules (unlikely – but this is Trump, like no other), this is his last term in office; so he doesn’t have any fears about re-election. Big Tech is all lined up behind him.
Could it all fall apart? Of course, but as I suggested; he has set this up as doing his job, and acting fast; so that the first criticism will fall on those who implement, and don’t deliver; rather than him.
I think the wish was father to your thought.
In contrast, the way we have been doing politics in Britain is so paralysed by fear of the political downside, we settle for doing nothing at all. The same fiscal rules will have effectively operated in Britain for twenty straight years, if Labour go to term; and it has been twenty catastrophic, failed years. The contrast is stark. There is little we can do about trump, but we are the proverbial political self-inflicted ‘basket case’. The electorate cannot even find anyone to vote for, to deliver anything at all, save the past disasters, repeated endlessly.
I suspect you need to revisit your “Uh” and apply it somewhere else.
Yes, he lies about accomplishing things. It doesn’t mean he actually does most of the things he promises. The number of times he said he had a healthcare bill that is coming out in “2 weeks” is comical.
Specifically on airports, the government should be trying to reduce the number of passengers who change between flights at Heathrow and for whom London is not the final destination. There would be no need for another runway.
Agreed
But we are seeing dinosaur thinking on this issue from thsie whio clearly do not care
The Climate Change Committee now appears to be controlled by scientifically ignorant MPs. They seem not to understand a) the urgency (our policies are now a couple of decades too late to avoid the worst aspects of climate change), and b) that to make a serious reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, energy needs to be rationed and/or expensive.
However, the Committee wants electricity to be cheap! They argue that this would encourage a faster voluntary change over from predominantly gas-powered home heating to electrically-powered methods such as heat pumps.
Last week a parliamentary committee questioned the committee’s officers. Several times an officer said something like ‘We produce reports when asked by the responsible MPs – but we are not elected representatives so we do not offer our views on that matter.’
It seems to me (I was a physics teacher) that MPs don’t understand very well and they use party loyalty inappropriately to prevent the population from being adequately informed.
In response to Joe: the CCC is populated by the professional managerial caste, membership of which requires that you have little knowledge – indeed, selection of people to infest the CCC is probably based on that criteria.
As for making energy more expensive – well you can make it zero carbon and less expensive – particualrly if you implement community energy schemes (if you fancy doing one in your neck of the woods – do let me know).
In the case of flights – charging VAT on fuel plus sensible carbon pricing plus … a ration card. All people in the population get one & it gives them X,000 miles of flights per year. The miles on the card can be sold via a gov broker – who will mark up the miles geometrically, adding a zero to the price for each addtional X,000 bought by the (mostly) highly mobile middle classes. Easy enough to give those that want it one flight – & all those people @ Heathrow could then be redeployed to more useful work. Hope I don’t sound too Stalinist.
I like it
@ Joe Burlington,
I’m not following your logic.
If electricity is produced without burning fossil fuels; what’s the problem? If the infrastructure required, to harness clean energy, is (or becomes) carbon free also; what is the problem with making it cheap enough to incentivise the switch from gas? It is, after all, already cheaper to produce than electricity from gas. Why is that not being reflected in consumer bills?
I’m all for reducing demand, it’ll help the transition process. However effective we at that, it’ll be small scale in comparison to replacing all direct and indirect fossil fuel use.
I don’t foresee any insurmountable problems in creating a carbon free energy supply; in practical terms at least. In fact, I can envisage a time when we’ll be actively looking for solutions to dealing with excess capacity. To meet peak demand, even under optimal conditions, will mean excess capacity off-peak. To meet peak demand in suboptimal conditions, means building redundancy into the system, therefore even more excess capacity off-peak. I’m not seeing rationing as a necessity, because part of the solution (to intermittency) will guarantee overproduction under ideal conditions.
we *are* at that
But Heathrow makes money from all those flight changes. GDP!! Growth!!!
@ Rick Jones,
If I were to take your post literally, I’d be calling you Rachel and claiming my fiver:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/22/rachel-reeves-says-growth-matters-more-than-net-zero-heathrow-third-runway-decision
John S Warren, thanks.
The real people who learnt the lessons from Trump 1 were the extreme right wing wealthy backers who funded the research that produced amongst other thing Trump 2025 and the Executive Orders for him to sign immediately.
Take the America First trade policy order which includes a demand to investigate if US companies operating abroad are subject to ” discriminatory or extraterritorial taxes”.
US presidential executive orders are not automatically legal.
This particular order is based on the assumption that the President can make an order under the US tax code to permit the Federal Government to impose higher taxes on non US companies trading in the US.
“Permit” is the crucial word. This plus nearly all of the other orders will be challenged in the US Courts by groups that will be declared to be part of the deep state/swamp “thwarting” Trump. Trump has said that he will not be ” thwarted”.
The US Federal Government will be used to fight the challenges all the way to the Supreme Court and we know what the likely judgements will be.
The US state apparatus is being turned on itself to cement a huge extension of Presidential power.
That’s the real skill.
In the UK the last Troy government introduced laws to stop protests and those charged with criminal protest offences giving a proper defence of their actions.
So far Labour have shown no intention of repealing these laws.
The UK runs a real risk of sleep walking into the same scenario as the USA.
I usually take my joined up thinking – straight no ice and no olives. : “encouraging overseas holidays”………….hmm how is that going to work? let’s take a look shall we?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/aug/19/barcelona-mass-tourism-visitors-city-industry
or
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/20/a-vicious-circle-how-the-roof-blew-off-spains-housing-crisis
or
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/14/tokyo-drift-what-happens-when-a-city-stops-being-the-future
So lets build more airport capacity cos the rest of the world will welcome UK tourists?. Another example of what passes for thinking by the McSweeney tribe. The imbeciles can’t see farther than the end of their noses. Doubtless, the building sector has been “advising” the penumbra of “advisers” surrounding Starmer.
Much to agree with
I agree that there are a lot of lessons that have not been learnt by good people who should have and a lot of other lessons learnt by people who cannot be trusted at all.
But I go back to BREXIT.
We saw the power of using the internet and social media to exploit discontent.
And we have still not done anything at all about that, indeed we now know there will be lot less fact checking.
For me this is important – it reminds me that people like Trump and events like BREXIT are tinged or marked with an indelible illegitimacy that I think we must not lose sight of. Because as well as making them detestable which they truly are, they are also perennially contestable, and that is important.
Thanks.
Much to agree with
John Fairhall says:
“The US state apparatus is being turned on itself to cement a huge extension of Presidential power.
That’s the real skill.
In the UK the last Troy government introduced laws to stop protests and those charged with criminal protest offences giving a proper defence of their actions.
So far Labour have shown no intention of repealing these laws.
The UK runs a real risk of sleep walking into the same scenario as the USA.
Thanks John a great summary I couldn’t agree more.
In fact I would go further I think Rather than sleepwalking we are “Eyes wide open” on this.
It all looks so pre planned: Blair gets elected with a huge unassailable majority and spends 14 years tinkering around the edges of neoliberalism but brings no substantive change to our society or our laws the poor are left to sink or swim, whilst he is relaxed about the wealthy getting richer.
Starmer gets elected with a huge unassailable majority and spends unknown years tinkering around the edges of neoliberalism but brings no substantive change to our society or our laws the poor are left to sink or swim, whilst he is relaxed about the wealthy getting richer.
The media are left to lie and smear whilst their offshore billionaire owners pay no taxes.
The BBC still has three conservative party activistst at the helm and offcom are an absolute joke but no action is ever taken.
But during Tory years in power laws, rhetoric, dogma and economics are ratcheted ever further to the right.
That’s how we end up where we are.
We will probably never know if Blair and Starmer were Mi5 operatives or just usefull idiots.
But it is the vast majority in our society that will pay the cost of climate change and more neoliberalism foisted on us by our incompetant leaders and their corruption.
Much to agree with
I think that the saying, so often seen on social media, ‘if you are not terrified by now, you’re not paying attention’, has never been so true as this week.
Our civilisation is in rapid decline, all civilisations before have gone the same way each thing that happens, in this case accelerating the climate crisis, brings us closer to the end. The difference this time is that the climate crisis is rapidly becoming so overwhelming, so damaging (fires, floods, storms, crop damage, water supplies, food shortages etc) , so very close to the places and people that we love, that the end of our civilisation maybe the end for us. And that’s a very big existential threat that most people cannot/will not comprehend and so we drift into that dark night while the super rich think their bunkers will protect them and play around trying to get to other planets.
Its all just overwhelmingly sad.
Agreed
And all the while we have egotists like Putin & Netanyahu (and Trump for that matter) obsessing over patches of land and destroying everything in their wake, as if that’s going to improve anything for anyone.