Theresa May will legally commit to ending the UK’s contribution to global warming by 2050 before she leaves No 10, but there are fears of a “get-out clause” that could allow her successor to roll back on the measures.
Critics have also highlighted the lack of a detailed action plan.
The prime minister will announce legislation to set a path to “net zero” greenhouse gas emissions by the middle of the century, as recommended by her climate change advisers.
But there are concerns the move – an attempt to create a “legacy” achievement for a PM forced out of office for her Brexit failure – will fail to bind her successor to detailed action to help curb runaway climate change.
Friends of the Earth warned of “cynical gesture politics” if the legal commitment was not backed with real teeth in terms of policy and money.
Ms. May is also under pressure from her chancellor to agree an “explicit review point”, allowing the next government to rethink the 2050 commitment if other countries fail to follow suit.
In a leaked letter, Philip Hammond claimed the plan put forward by the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) – including an end to petrol and diesel cars and gas boilers and a huge shift to green energy, as well as drastic cuts in meat-eating – would cost more than £1 trillion.
He was immediately accused by green groups and opposition politicians of trying to block effective action by “putting ideology before our wellbeing”.
It appeared unlikely the legislation would have an action plan attached, as it can be achieved by simply changing the 2008 Climate Change Act through a new regulation.
The bid to make the UK a world leader on climate change comes after a poll for The Independent found overwhelming support, with 59 percent of voters in favor of the net-zero pledge and only 8 percent against.
It could be introduced as early as next week – as Conservative MPs stage the first votes to find Ms. May’s successor, with the winner due to move into Downing Street in late July.
A government source told The Independent the move was expected to have “broad parliamentary support”, with only a few Tory mavericks likely to voice opposition.
Emissions from some activities, including air travel and farming, are viewed as unavoidable by 2050, but “net zero” would be achieved by taking carbon out of the air by growing trees or burying carbon dioxide.
However, Mr. Hammond’s letter undermined the plan by warning it would shrink the money available for schools, the NHS, the police and other public spending priorities.
Read more at The Independent
Remember a few years they produced a film EXPELLED NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED you know why our Collages suck big time
Global warming made her cry . Or maybe it was the disingenuous approach to honor the vote exiting the UN .
This is the growing problem . Socialists will respect a vote providing it goes their way .
Same thing in the USA election . The Democrats and top justice officials conspired to over turn an election .
FBI jack ass Peter Strzok to his shag pal …. We will stop him .
The left digs in hard when their liberal bubble gets popped .
Global warming made her cry . Or maybe it was the disingenuous approach to honor the vote exiting the UN .
This is the growing problem . Socialists will respect a vote providing it goes their way .
Same thing in the USA election . The Democrats and top justice officials conspired to over turn an election .
FBI jack ass Peter Strzok to his shag pal …. We will stop him .
The left digs in hard when their liberal bubble gets popped .
Obama wanted a legacy and chose climate change. It is obvious that anything that can be done can be undone. But with 59% supporting strong action on climate change Britain is not to the point of doing a u-turn. There will have to disastrous consequence from their green policies first. Not only is going to zero emissions unaffordable, even if it were it is not possible.
The warning that the plan would shrink the money available for schools, the NHS, the police and other public spending priorities probably only considered the cost of implementing the plan. It is doubtful that they consider a shrinking tax base caused by industries leaving the UK and huge increase in unemployment.
I cannot see any legal way that a future government cannot undo what was done by a previous one. And with this global warming scam a future government better pull it’s collective head out of its arse and start to use fossil fuels again to keep from having their population resort to living standards of the 1800’s and before.
This quote from the article is hilarious: “putting ideology before our wellbeing”
You fools actually implement what you are pushing there will be no wellbeing. But your ideology is forcing you to do idiotic things like eliminating the energy sources which are giving you a level of wellbeing never seen before energy became cheap and plentiful.
A last, vindictive shot. Good riddance.
Just for the record, there is no law or treaty that cannot be undone if the will exists.
Indeed, true that.
Those criminal greens have no idea what their plans will mean for humanity.
They talk about carbon, but that shows they really have no idea what they are talking about.