This post is by Rebecca Willis, professor in energy & climate governance at Lancaster Environment Centre. It was first published on theClimate Citizens website.
My team at Lancaster has hundreds of climate conversations with people from all walks of life, as part of our research. It’s very clear from these conversations that Keir Starmer said the wrong thing at COP 29.
The prime minister does, of course, deserve a bucketload of credit for even turning up at the COP 29 climate summit, when many world leaders stayed away; and for announcing the UK’s new plan to achieve 81 per cent reductions in greenhouse gases by 2035, in line with the recommendation by the Climate Change Committee. And, back home, his government’s relentless focus on achieving net zero emissions, one of Labour’s five ‘missions’, is a breath of fresh air.
People don’t want government to get out of the way
Yet, despite this enthusiasm, Starmer made a critical misstep by insisting that people need not worry, because, as he told the BBC, “what we’re not going to do, is start telling people how to live their lives”. This is a mistake for two reasons. First, because it’s just not true. There’s not a scenario out there that gets us to net zero without changes to people’s lives and homes, like better insulation; an end to gas heating; electric cars and more public transport; and lower emission food. But second, because our research shows it’s what people do not want to hear about government. Our research shows that people want government to lead and help, not get out of the way.
Our research with citizen panels shows that most people are concerned about climate, and they want government to lead, because they understand that actions by individuals are not enough. They want government to put policies in place that will enable them to contribute. They want heat pumps to be as cheap as gas boilers, and they want public transport options that offer an alternative to driving to work. They even generally support policies which encourage people to fly less. They are asking for more, but trust is low, and they are just not confident that government will deliver.
Opponents of action are in the minority
Of course, there are people who oppose any climate action, but they are in the minority. Opponents get a lot of media attention, as do climate protesters like Just Stop Oil. But most people don’t fall into either of these camps. They are willing, in principle, even if they don’t shout about it.
A prime minister who understood this would make a very different speech. Not “we won’t tell you how to live your life’” Instead, he could have said, “We know that you’re worried about the climate crisis, and that you want to play your part. It’s government’s job to make sure you can do that.”
The government’s strategy would change, too. Rather than going for the least visible strategies, or climate action by stealth, there would be a focus on policies that build engagement and support, like community ownership of renewable energy, and information and support for home energy retrofits. Government would think in terms of a ‘social contract’ for climate: “we, government, are doing x, so that together we can achieve y”. For example, they would say “we are investing in home energy retrofits, so that together we can make our homes warmer and reduce our climate impacts.”
Leaning in to people’s concern would help to build their support, and their trust in government’s ability to act. Our research suggests that people, as well as the climate, would thank them.
Discover more from Inside track
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
