Book Read Free

BLAIR’S BRITAIN, 1997–2007

Page 91

by ANTHONY SELDON (edt)


  public concern for ethical and environmental consumerism, as demonstrated most aptly by the Fair Trade movement, has created an entirely

  new market that companies have been keen to capitalise on. For instance,

  Tesco announced this year that it would carbon footprint its entire inventory, partly in response to Marks and Spencer’s announcement that it

  would make the company carbon neutral within five years.6

  Coupled with this, climate change has cemented its position on the international agenda, starting with the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, and to a greater

  extent through Blair’s presidency of the G8 Summit in Gleneagles in 2005.

  The Stern Review, commissioned by the British government at Gleneagles,

  has been crucial to this changing international atmosphere and has

  managed to take climate change out of the exclusive and marginalised

  domain of environmentalism. Whereas ecological arguments have often

  been stigmatised as condemning society to lower rates of economic growth,

  Stern allied the climate change agenda with aspirations for growth and prosperity, immediately granting the cause a wider audience and legitimacy.

  New Labour has undoubtedly stolen a march on the climate change

  agenda, and Britain has clearly worked itself to a level of unprecedented

  international influence within this movement. This success has not been

  lost on the main opposition parties, with David Cameron striving to rebrand the Conservative Party as the green choice, even adopting a tree as

  the party’s new symbol.

  5 ‘A New Dawn’, The Guardian, 31 October 2006.

  6 David Derbyshire, ‘Tesco’s Carbon “Footprints” ’, The Telegraph, 21 January 2007.

  

   

  New Labour in power

  A fundamental challenge in tackling climate change has been the need to

  rearticulate the climate change threat and its solutions in new and constructive terms. Indeed, New Labour has proved extremely successful and

  flexible in the manner in which it has capitalised on the growing climate

  change movement, yet simultaneously adapted and rearticulated it for

  mainstream consumption.

  Climate change had originally been propelled up national and international agendas as a result of a number of environmental movements,

  in much the same way as international development had been through

  campaigns such as Drop the Debt, the Jubilee campaign, and Make

  Poverty History. The growth of NGOs such as Greenpeace, and the

  success of various ‘Green’ parties in elections across Europe, have proved

  testimony to the growing strength of the environmental movement from

  the 1990s. Yet environmentalism was never in and of itself the primary

  concern of Labour party policy. Rather it has been constructed within the

  ideological narratives of the party’s economic and social agendas, as the

  government tried to redefine the entire climate change agenda away from

  a ‘green movement’ that was increasingly associated with its minority

  and radical extremes. ‘By exaggerating the trade off between economic

  dynamism and environmental protection, between human welfare and

  nature, the politics of the environment failed to gain the legitimacy

  needed to make it a governing idea for a majority party.’7 Environmental

  policies for New Labour were to be combined with economic and social

  progress, with the challenges of climate change and economic growth

  framed in terms of sustainable development and ecological modernisation. For New Labour and for Blair, ‘the very act of solving [climate

  change] can unleash a new and benign commercial force to take the

  action forward, providing jobs, technology spin-offs and new business

  opportunities as well as protecting the world we live in’.8

  The attempt to mainstream the climate change agenda was further

  buoyed by the growing scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate

  change. Across the environmental sector, given the very nature of the

  subject, the scientific community has a unique role to play in setting the

  political agenda. It is only through scientific and authoritative assessment

  that issues such as climate change can be demonstrated to be real, threat17 David Miliband, ‘Red-Green Labour in Power’, Fabian Review, 119(1), 2007: 16.

  18 Blair, ‘International Action Needed on Global Warming’.

   

  

  ening, and worthy of political attention. Without this catalyst, environmental issues are typically marginal concerns for politicians preoccupied

  with the immediate threats and priorities of health, crime, the economy

  and security.

  As such, the scientific developments over the last ten years have helped

  propel the climate change agenda, regardless of individual politicking. In

  1995, the IPCC produced its Second Assessment Report in which it stated

  that ‘the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on

  the global climate’.9 Though extremely cautious in its conclusion, this

  was the first time that the IPCC had ever made such a link between

  climate extremes and theories of human-caused climate change. Further

  to this, the RCEP in its 2000 report Energy: The Changing Climate, stated

  as its basic premise that anthropogenic climate change is already happening, with negative consequences for the UK.

  Pushing for a scientific consensus was central to the government’s, and

  in particular Blair’s, strategy to promote the climate change agenda in the

  run-up to the G8 Summit in 2005. A key event in this was the scientific

  conference held at the Hadley Centre in Exeter in February 2005, entitled

  ‘Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change’. Given the gap since the last IPCC

  report in 2001, the conference served as Blair’s way of updating the world

  community on the science of climate change. Indeed, with the Hadley

  Centre recognised as one of the world’s leading places for modelling the

  environment, the conference served ‘as a milestone in building an international consensus on climate change’.10

  A second challenge to confronting climate change is the need for collective and coherent policy action, and Labour’s 1997 manifesto did

  indeed indicate an appreciation of the need to develop consistent policy

  across the entire machinery of government. The 1997 manifesto stated

  that ‘The foundation of Labour’s environmental approach is that protection of the environment cannot be the sole responsibility of any one

  department of state. All departments must promote policies to sustain

  the environment.’11 To this end the government created a super-ministry

  in the form of the Department for Environment, Transport and the

  Regions, along with the Sustainable Development Unit. In addition, the

  19 IPCC Second Assessment, Climate Change, A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on

  Climate Change (Geneva: IPCC, 1995), p. 5.

  10 ‘Towards a Consensus on Climate Change’, Met Office, Hadley Centre, Exeter, 3 February

  2005.

  11 Labour Party Manifesto, 1997, available at: www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/

  1997-labour-manifesto.shtml.

  

   

  Environmental Audit Committee was established to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s environmental policy.


  The government has also sought to take the policy lead through emission targets and policy innovations that were much more stringent than

  those of the UK’s European and more distant neighbours. The 1997 manifesto committed the government to a target of a 20% reduction in CO2

  levels by 2010 based on 1990 levels, which was above the Kyoto target negotiated internationally that year to reduce emissions of GHGs by 12.5% over

  a similar period. Despite this, the RCEP 2000 report challenged the government to cut CO emissions by 60% from their 2000 levels by 2050,

  2

  which at the time the Cabinet Office’s Performance and Innovation Unit

  declared too ambitious a long-term target, especially when no other state

  in the world was yet emphatically committed to addressing climate change.

  Nonetheless, the 2003 Energy White Paper, Our Energy Future – Creating a

  Low Carbon Economy, did indeed commit the UK to reducing its CO emis2

  sions by 60% in accordance with the RCEP’s recommendations.

  The 2000 UK Climate Change Programme set out a raft of policy measures that the government intended to pursue in order to achieve these

  targets. Given that much of the input to this document came from the

  former president of the Confederation of British Industries, Lord

  Marshall, it is unsurprising that New Labour’s most significant policy

  innovations have been in the business sector. One such example is the

  Climate Change Levy (CCL), imposed on businesses as a means of

  encouraging energy efficiency. Those companies that successfully

  increased energy efficiency had their revenue reimbursed through lower

  National Insurance contributions. Indeed, successful cooperation with

  business in tackling climate change has been a key feature of Labour’s

  approach to the problem, as exemplified by the formation of the Carbon

  Trust, with the express aims of reducing carbon emissions in business, and

  encouraging change in business attitude and behaviour towards climate

  change. In addition, the top CEOs from the UK’s leading companies were

  brought together under the banner of the Climate Group in April 2004,

  with the task of leading the UK business sector in tackling climate change.

  As for the transport sector, the 1997 manifesto promised to develop an

  integrated transport policy to fight congestion and pollution. This

  was echoed by the DETR’s 1998 White Paper, A New Deal for Transport –

  Better for Everyone, expressing a commitment to a ‘sustainable’ transport system. Indeed, the road fuel duty escalator, introduced by the

  Conservatives in 1993, had been most effective to this end, and in 1997

  Gordon Brown raised the escalator from 5% to 6%. The UK Climate

   

  

  Change Programme itself stated that the duty had ‘sent a clear signal to

  manufacturers to design more fuel-efficient vehicles, and to motorists to

  avoid unnecessary journeys and to consider alternatives to the car’.12

  However, rising oil prices towards the end of the 1990s led to intense criticism of the UK’s relatively high levels of fuel taxation, and to subsequent

  fuel protests in September 2000. Terrified that the blockades could cripple

  the government, the escalator was abandoned in Brown’s pre-Budget

  report in November 2000, with fuel duties in the future decided on a

  Budget-by-Budget basis. Since 2000 the main transport sector initiative has

  thus been voluntary agreements on car fuel efficiency, and a Europe-wide

  1996 Community Strategy to improve the average fuel efficiency of new

  cars sold in the EU by 35% by 2010 against a 1995 baseline.13 As a further

  mechanism to encourage changes in consumer attitudes, the Vehicle Excise

  Duty was introduced in 1998, with a top rate of £400 for the most polluting

  cars as of the 2007 Budget. Finally, as of November 2005, transport fuel

  suppliers were required by the Renewables Transport Obligation to ensure

  that 5% of their sales are from renewable sources by 2010–11.

  In the housing sector, Labour has most successfully balanced its social,

  economic and environmental goals through the Warm Front scheme and

  the Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC). Through the EEC, gas and

  electricity suppliers are required to achieve certain targets for the promotion of energy efficiency, with the extra stipulation that half the savings

  must be in households on low income-related benefits or tax credits.

  Nonetheless, the EEC aside, it is already apparent that, compared to the

  business sector, Labour has found it difficult to tackle domestic or indeed

  transport emissions. Whereas taxation in the business sector through the

  CCL has been successful and grudgingly accepted, there are paralysing

  concerns that taxation in the domestic and transport sectors is highly

  regressive, hitting the poorest hardest and thus heavily undermining the

  party’s social and economic agendas.

  In terms of addressing the UK energy sector, successive Labour governments have failed to develop a coherent strategy to meet the country’s

  future energy needs and mix. Since coming to office, Labour has completed three energy reviews, none of which have come close to resolving

  the problem. Blair himself has pushed the case for nuclear energy, in

  the face of stiff opposition from a number of senior cabinet ministers, as

  12 DETR, Climate Change: The UK Programme (London: TSO, 2000), p. 92.

  13 Friends of the Earth, ‘EU Targets for Greener Cars too Weak’ , press release, 7 February

  2007.

  

   

  the only way for the UK to meet its energy security and environmental

  needs. However, the 2006 energy review arguing the economic case for

  new nuclear build has since been subject to successful legal action by

  Greenpeace for the flaws in the review process. In terms of renewable

  energy there remains the government’s 1997 manifesto commitment to

  meet 10% of UK energy needs from renewable resources by 2010. To this

  end the Renewable Obligation was launched in 2002, replacing the

  Conservative’s Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation, tying energy suppliers to producing 10.4% of their energy from renewable sources by 2010/11. More

  recently, the incorporation of the UK energy sector and other energyintensive industries into the European Emissions Trading Scheme as of

  2005 seeks to further boost energy efficiency and renewable energy

  through market-driven competition.

  Yet, as the UK only accounts for approximately 2% of global CO emis2

  sions, tackling climate change also necessitates overcoming the key challenges discussed above at the international level. In this respect, Blair’s

  governments have not only signalled their dedication to the climate

  change agenda domestically, but also managed to drag other countries

  and institutions into binding commitments and targets. This was most

  clearly the case with the UK’s presidency of the G8 at Gleneagles where

  climate change figured alongside Africa as a key theme for the summit. As

  a result of this summit, the G8 leaders for the first time reached an agreement on the role of human activity in global warming and the need for

  urgent action, including substantial cuts in their own emissions. Further

  to this, and reinforcing the message that this was not a temporar
y fad for

  the G8 to concern itself with, the G8 leaders committed themselves, along

  with the leaders of India, Brazil, China, Mexico and South Africa, to continue a dialogue on climate change, clean energy and sustainable development to lay the foundations for a successor to the Kyoto Treaty.

  Critically, just as Blair’s governments were redefining climate change

  domestically as more than just a niche environmental concern, this

  rearticulation proved vital on the international stage. Crucial to this

  change was the publication of the Stern Review in October 2006, originally commissioned at the G8 in Gleneagles.

  The Stern Review categorically states that ‘Tackling climate change is

  the pro-growth strategy for the longer term, and it can be done in a way

  that does not cap the aspirations for growth of rich or poor countries.

  The earlier effective action is taken, the less costly it will be.’14 Though

  14 Stern Review, The Economics of Climate Change (London: HM Treasury, 2006), p. ii.

   

  

  Stern’s message echoed much of what was reported elsewhere in the

  climate change literature at the time, the fact that the message came from

  an entirely different messenger – that is, from a world-renowned economist with the endorsement of the UK Treasury and Prime Minister

  (rather than just the ‘environment ministry’, DEFRA) – meant that the

  national and international audience was immediately more attuned to

  what the Review had to say. The Stern Review completely reshaped the

  political atmosphere with respect to the climate change agenda and

  created the political space and opportunity which Blair has capitalised on

  both nationally and internationally. However, as the following section

  details, it has proved extremely difficult to translate intent, ambition and

  desire into quantifiable achievements.

  The green industrial revolution?

  The UK has had some marked success in reducing emissions of GHGs,

  and is on course to surpass its Kyoto targets. DEFRA’s 2006 review of the

  UK’s Climate Change Programme (figure 26.1) stated that annual emissions of the six GHGs covered by the Kyoto Treaty fell by 14.6% between

  1990 and 2004, with the expectation that emissions of these GHGs will

  be 20% below 1990 levels by 2010. Yet the report admits that CO emis2

 

‹ Prev