Photosynthesis [image credit: Nefronus @ Wikipedia]
Climate lawfare by carbophobes again. ‘The ball is in your court, Prime Minister’. At the same time the Scottish Nationalists have reported the PM to the police over comments in his conference speech.
– – –
Chris Packham has sent a legal challenge to the Prime Minister over his decision to delay the phase-out of new gas boilers and petrol and diesel cars, reports The National (via Yahoo News).
If Rishi Sunak does not reverse the changes he announced last month, Packham said he will apply to the High Court to challenge this in a judicial review – arguing that such a delay is unlawful given the Government is required to follow a series of carbon budget plans on the way to becoming net zero by 2050.
The Prime Minister said the sale of new fossil fuel cars will not be phased out in 2030 but in 2035 and that only 80% of gas boilers will need to be phased out by that date, instead of 100%.
He said that because the UK has so far decarbonised faster than other developed countries, it can afford to relax its net-zero policies, telling the country that the approach to net zero is imposing “unacceptable costs on hard-pressed British families” that “no one was ever told about”.
Packham said this change of direction was made without any public consultation, without informing parliament or the Climate Change Committee (CCC) – which advises the Government on how to meet its carbon budgets.
He said the Prime Minister is “playing populist politics with the future of life on Earth”, adding: “Even before this spontaneous, ill-judged and – we contend – unlawful announcement, the UK Government’s plans to meet its legal net-zero commitments were shambolic and destined to failure.
“Its own Climate Change Committee’s last report said that continued delays in policy development and implementation meant reaching those targets was increasingly challenging.
“It also highlighted a lack of urgency across government, a worrying hesitancy and lack of political leadership on the climate issue.”
Full report here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
This why the Climate Change Act needs to be repealed, ASAP, and CCC disbanded, as (i) it would remove the basis for such legal challenges, and (ii) return to the basis where no government can bind future governments. Anyway, if Sunak gets his mind to it, govt lawyers should be able to see off this challenge. Whichever way though, it’s a crazy waste of taxpayers’, i.e. MY, money.
Hoch, another one of those wasted skins where we ponder about giving air time to / Oxygen of publicity ,or is it all just keeping the finger on the pulse?
“playing populist politics with the future of life on Earth” we shouldn’t be doing that AT ALL …. Didn’t they do well? Now just about ALL Live broadcasts in Europe feature this stupid choral song.
The Kings New Clothes is definitely NOT the one they are playing.
Yes indeed.
I had to to have a colonoscopy on Wednesday. It was not pleasant, but the good news is there was no trace of Chris Packham or any other nastiness up there. Perhaps he’s up his own…….. repealing the act was the basis of my talk to REFORM last year… Can Back to the Future Work? The wiser political minds say roll back the dates and the targets and let it die on the vine as global climate gets colder, or basically doesn’t change, while China and India pump out more CO2 jams than ever, and even the believe what they’re told, celeb following, quiz show watching, simple minded masses become dimly aware of the fiscal fraud imposed in the name of an absolute, contrived science fraud, a deliberate, not accidental, attack on their hard earned income and their freedoms, for NOTHING BACK, ANYWHERE. In case anyone cares about what anyone else thinks, this is my attempt to communicate with engaged lay people of some reasonable ability in their own disciplines, whatever they are. It’s not bad, the wrap needs work. I have given an improved version since.
Can post here be edited somehow? Meanwhile typos excepted. Ap-ologies Too busy to f*** with crappy UI designs. etc. Best, B
[mod] will have a go 🙂
Net zero fanaticism won’t attract people to Britain, it’ll put them off
Fears the recent watering down of green targets will harm UK PLC are unfounded. If anything, it will do the opposite
ROSS CLARK @ Telegraph Comment
6 October 2023
. . .
Even after Sunak’s minor rethink, Britain remains one of the nations most obsessed with net zero. The legally-binding 2050 target remains, as does the Government’s target for decarbonising the grid by 2035. Sunak has announced £20 billion of public investment into carbon capture and storage, and upped the grants for heat pumps from £5,000 to £7,500.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/06/net-zero-fanaticism-wont-attract-people-to-britain/
– – –
Sunak barely moved the needle on damaging net zero policy. Has Packham gone over the top for self-publicity?
It would be of greater benefit to phase out Packham.
‘Packham said this change of direction was made without any public consultation’
What change of direction? Arriving a bit later than originally planned is still a move in the same direction.
In a large part because the original goals were set irrationally without any public consultation. As detail scrutiny of thee claimate science supporting net zero as well as the technical viability of ths subsidy fuelled prevfailed horses the government backed is what has been asked for. But nota consukatation where the tell you what they are going to do to enrich their friends and impoverish our economy by their regressive laws.
PS Typos excepted as they can’t be edited 😉
[mod] maybe use a spell checker? 🙂
https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12027911?sjid=3786287675275350366-EU
Net zero is a politicians phrase. It is wholly meaningless.
It has nothing to do with science.
So it’s populist but bad because it wasn’t subject to public consultation? And if it’s destined to failure anyway, then the change makes no difference.
As for a judicial review, that stands no chance.
Packham is as ever grandstanding his massive ego.
Nor has “climate science”, rod!