Climate change and the Conservatives: fourteen years of chilling indifference

Climate change has rapidly grown to become one of the British people’s largest concerns. However, although its threat has never changed, it appears the rate of action towards climate change has only ever been in relation to public awareness, with the UK government often acting not when the issue emerges, but when the mass population becomes aware of it. Be it the coalition with the Liberal Democrats, to Theresa May’s crescendo that declared an effective climate emergency, or Liz Truss’ fracking fanaticism, the last fourteen years have been marked by somewhat of a quiet rise of climate concern within Whitehall. 

When David Cameron was first pitching to become Prime Minister, he tried to style himself as an environmentalist, planning to cap emissions and promote renewable energy sources. This was an attempt to make environmentalism and combating climate change compatible with his neoliberal view of economics. However, upon entering government, his priorities changed. In the eyes of figures like Cameron and Osborne, austerity was a necessity beyond any other policy. Department budgets were cut, and the public focus shifted towards a need to reduce rather than invest. Such processes resulted in a lot of backtracking. In July 2015, the Treasury scrapped the government’s plans to make all new UK homes carbon neutral by 2016. Rather, pushes for climate-consciousness were largely led by figures including the former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and former U.S. President Barack Obama. When David Cameron became Prime Minister in 2010, he wanted to lead the “greenest government ever”. But it may have been the failure of Cameron’s government to put public focus onto the climate that has caused anger from both those who think the climate isn’t a priority, and those whom think it should be prioritised above all else.  

By making climate change an economic problem, profit and revenue become the central concerns, rather than the climate itself

Theresa May is normally remembered for two things, wheat fields, and more importantly, Brexit. But it was May’s government that oversaw a real leap forward in terms of climate awareness, even though for most of her tenure, this largely came secondary to other policies. Central to this was when May’s ministers amended the 2008 Climate Change Act to end the UK’s contribution to global warming by 2050. This appeared to be a clear step in the right direction, but pressure from within the Conservative party after she left office has severely impacted the attitudes of many towards the need to reduce emissions. In addition, May disbanded the Department of Energy and Climate Change and moved responsibility for tackling environmental issues to both the Department for Energy, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the then Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Department. If wording is anything to go by, it appears that Theresa May’s government sought to make climate change a business concern. This economic attitude towards climate change may be what is making the issue ever more difficult to approach in terms of the public’s response. By making climate change an economic problem, profit and revenue become the central concerns, rather than the climate itself. In this regard, it appears that governments working within a neoliberal economic context will only ever deal with the issue of climate change when a profit incentive emerges. This legacy, and the wider economic outlook over the past fourteen years, has been central in delaying climate responses.  

Even with this point of negativity, Theresa May still seems considerably greener than any of her successors. 

Pressure culminated in Sunak’s dropping of many key climate targets

With Boris Johnson, many see a man who says a lot but often acts differently, and on climate change, this was far too often the case. Many environmental groups supported the ambitious targets of the Johnson government, however, many also saw an inability to establish a coherent plan for delivering them. Johnson also oversaw the COP26 Summit in Glasgow, and his move to make Alok Sharma its President, with a seat at the Cabinet table, did appear to suggest some planning had occurred. COP26 also prompted other countries who had previously dragged their heels to take the climate more seriously. His government also acted to decarbonise large parts of the UK’s electricity grid. 

For Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, there are clear similarities. Whilst fracking was more of a hallmark of Truss’ limited tenure, both experienced large pressure both from those within their party and right-wing lobbies to water down action on climate change. Central to this are the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, that was formed in 2021, but grew to prominence over the issue of ensuring carbon neutrality. This pressure culminated in Sunak’s dropping of many key climate targets, including the phasing out of gas boiler sales and a loosening of the plan to ban sales of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030. If these actions served to do anything, it was set the UK even further away from achieving its targets, which the Conservative government themselves set. 

So, if the past fourteen years have offered an insight into Conservative action on the climate, it has taught us three things. Firstly, the importance of presentation. All Conservative Prime Ministers since 2010 have tried to present themselves as being alert to climate issues. Secondly, the role of wording and positioning. The way governments have worded strategies, department titles and climate change policy, has served to seriously harm any real action on this pressing issue. Thirdly, ambitious targets matter. Whilst this government has dragged its heels on serious climate action, targets have been set. As such, while progress has been made, we are severely off the mark with regard to the scale of our response to climate change – both in public awareness and government action.