Climate change is here and even though we are a small contributor what we do matters enormously, not in absolute terms, perhaps, but symbolically. Recently there has been a push back against even modest action. Given the overriding and critical nature of the problem, action on Climate should be cross-party and consensual. Recently it has descended into political knock about to which Labour has responded by backtracking, at the same claiming it needs to apply realism to its previous policy stance and delay action. In this short essay I explore the politicisation of climate as an issue, and explore what we should actually be doing.
The recently announced policy reversals [PM Speech] are presented as a realistic adjustment that is needed to stop huge costs falling on ordinary people who must be kept onside. The opposition is being portrayed as ideological and extreme.
The case against? Well why delay, it creates uncertainty for business, undermines our leading position and the impact on people is being used cynically. This is, after all, a straightforward political choice, we can chose to do the transition fairly or play politics with it [ULEZ]
Let’s unpick this: is it realism, can we hit 2050 and are we really loosing a leading position?