Boris Replaced By Melting Ice Sculpture As Party Leaders Outline Green Visions

authordefault
on

Leaders of Britainโ€™s major political parties โ€“ minus the governing Tories โ€“ have battled it out over their green credentials in the UKโ€™s first ever general election debate on the climateย emergency.

The leaders of the Labour Party, SNP, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party all participated in the detailed discussion on how to reduce the UKโ€™s carbon emissions and restore nature, which ranged from greenhouse gas reduction targets, to zero-carbon homes, to meatย consumption.

Conservative leader Boris Johnson chose not to participate, saying ahead of the debate that he did not want environmental issues to be โ€œsiloedโ€. Dripping ice sculptures stood where the leaders of the Conservative and Brexit parties would have been โ€“ a reminder of the glaciers that continue to melt while politicians fail to takeย action.

The event, hosted by broadcaster Channel 4, comes ahead of the general election on Decemberย 12.

There was no debate about the reality or urgency of tackling climate change; all leaders were broadly in agreement that emissions need to be reduced steeply in the coming years, and that nature needs to be restored โ€“ the Liberal Democratsโ€™ Jo Swinson was the only leader who did not support a 2030 net-zero goal, instead advocating for a 2045ย target.

Instead, it was a debate that, as the SNPโ€™s Nicola Sturgeon emphasised, was largely about โ€œcommon unity and purposeโ€, and the questions focused on the measures that the parties supported to achieve these goals. Brexit, which has dominated much of the election to date, was largely off the table during this discussion, although Swinson in particular stressed that she considered leaving the EU a โ€œclimateย crimeโ€.

While there was broad support for renewables, Corbyn was forced to defend his support for nuclear power, with Sturgeon demanding to know why he wasnโ€™t ruling out the technology. โ€œThere has to be a baseline of production of electricity from some totally sustainable source,โ€ said Corbyn, adding that any party that came into power would have to deal with a mixed powerย grid.

There was also widespread enthusiasm for zero-carbon homes, although the leaders struggled to answer exactly how they would retrofit the countryโ€™s existing housing stock. The Green Partyโ€™s Sian Berry said that ยฃ38 billion of the ยฃ100 billion that the party would spend on climate change was earmarked for improving the efficiency of the UKโ€™s housingย stock.

The question of whether British people should eat less meat proved difficult to navigate. While farming has a generally detrimental impact on biodiversity, some leaders were evidently wary of alienating rural voters. Plaid Cymruโ€™s leader, Adam Price, was reluctant to acknowledge that Walesโ€™ sheep farming industry might have to change in order to improve the nationโ€™s biodiversity and reduce its carbon footprint, stressing that farmers were โ€œalliesโ€ rather than โ€œenemiesโ€. It was an argument that didnโ€™t sit well with expert viewers: Doug Parr, Greenpeace UKโ€™s chief scientist, tweeted that Price was โ€œa bit all over the placeโ€ regardingย farming.

Climate change is expected to be a key topic in the general election. Voters will go to the polls following a year of heightened activism, including protests by Extinction Rebellion and school strikes inspired by Greta Thunberg. Aย YouGov pollย in November found that the environment had rocketed in importance for voters: in 2017, only 8% of British voters considered it one of the top three most important issues; today a quarter place it among their top three concerns, tied in fourth place with theย economy.

It was the first time that there had been a TV election debate on nature and climate. The event was organised after a petition by the climate NGO Possible, which ran a petition signed by more than 200,000 people. Max Wakefield, director at Possible, said that the debate โ€œhas set a new standard for political discourse around electionsโ€ and that it was clear that the โ€œclimate and nature emergencyโ€ had not previously received the attention itย deserved.

On Thursday,ย Buzzfeed reportedย that the Conservatives had threatened Channel 4 with a review of its broadcasting obligations. A party spokespersonย told the Guardianย the ice sculpture in place of Johnson was a โ€œa provocative partisanย stuntโ€.

The Conservative manifesto pledges to reduce emissions to net-zero by 2050, which is well behind most of the other parties. It also promises that the party will invest ยฃ800 million in carbon capture and storage, as well as another ยฃ500 million to help energy-intensive industries to low-carbonย techniques.

Greenpeace has criticised the Conservative manifesto as โ€œhalf-bakedโ€, while Caroline Lucas, a Green Party MP, condemned Johnsonโ€™s failure to appear at theย debate.

โ€œTwo thirds of the public, and half of his own voters want to see him join the worldโ€™s first televised leaders climate and nature debate,โ€ said Lucas. โ€œItโ€™s outrageous that he canโ€™t spare an hour to address the greatest challenges of our time. How are we supposed to trust the prime ministerโ€™s word that heโ€™s taking climate and nature emergencyย seriously?โ€

Related Posts

Analysis
on

We reflect on a year of agenda-setting stories that charted the political influence of fossil fuel interests in the UK and beyond.

We reflect on a year of agenda-setting stories that charted the political influence of fossil fuel interests in the UK and beyond.
on

The Heartland Institute, which questions human-made climate change, has established a new branch in London.

The Heartland Institute, which questions human-made climate change, has established a new branch in London.
on

At McNeese State Universityโ€™s LNG center, โ€œwe want to ensure that our LNG industry has a major say in research direction,โ€ one of its project leaders wrote.

At McNeese State Universityโ€™s LNG center, โ€œwe want to ensure that our LNG industry has a major say in research direction,โ€ one of its project leaders wrote.
on

But experts say these โ€œabusiveโ€ lawsuits, which are designed to demoralize and drain resources from activists, should be fought, not feared.

But experts say these โ€œabusiveโ€ lawsuits, which are designed to demoralize and drain resources from activists, should be fought, not feared.