We have a good climate change policy and we presented a more substantial, better thought-through programme on climate change than any of the other parties at the last election. Little of this received any prominence during the 2019 campaign, partly because we had limited scope to shape a debate which was focussed elsewhere, and partly due to tactical decisions we ourselves made.
But while we definitely don’t need to start from scratch on climate change, there is nonetheless work to do well in advance of setting out the party’s manifesto for the next general election.
First, our policy was written in 2019 and predates Covid, COP26 and the energy crisis. Inevitably it requires updating.
Second it is important that we continue to innovate from a policy perspective. In general it is helpful that 80% of our policy stays the same, so the public gets used to it, so we build an identity that people understand, and so on the doorsteps we know how to communicate it. But for our message to be fresh and inspiring, 20% of it needs to be new.
Third, we should be thinking now which parts of a very comprehensive climate change policy we will be wanting to spotlight in the manifesto.
The Green Liberal Democrats are undertaking a project to update, innovate, spotlight the party’s climate change policy, with some ideas to be presented at the party’s spring conference. Output from this will then feed into the broader process for developing the election manifesto.
As part of the project we are running a simple typeform survey.
It has just one question. What are the two most important actions to address global warming that the party should be campaigning on in the next election?
Bear in mind that the process is focussed on the party’s manifesto. So we are looking at
- What will help Lib Dem candidates get elected and
- Where, by making important policies an election issue, we can make them more likely to happen – through influencing public opinion, promoting smart ideas in the conversation within government, or helping establish a platform if we were to be part of negotiations around supporting a minority government.
So we are not trying so summarise the legion of things that need to be done on climate change in a few concise headings, or even, necessarily to focus on what is most important – rather to pick out some key ideas we will develop for a manifesto.
We look forward to receiving your feedback.
* Kevin has been a party member since June 2017, from Kingston
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1529
Liz Saville Roberts to Give the David Lloyd George Memorial Lecture at Gwyl Cricieth Festival
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
Kira Collins
Peter Martin
Gordon Lishman
Roland
David Murray
12 Comments
Over the last seven years there has been no “global warming”…
Climate at a Glance: Global Land and Ocean:
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/cag/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/all/7/2016-2022?trend=true&trend_base=10&begtrendyear=2016&endtrendyear=2022
The test of any hypothesis is its ability to correctly predict an outcome given a known set of inputs. The AGW hypothesis has repeatedly failed to do that. Climate models based upon it have proven to be widely inaccurate. For example, all the models predicted that the poles would warm at a faster rate than the rest of the planet. In recent years, they have done the opposite…
‘Antarctic interior posts coldest April-to-September on record’ [October 2021]:
https://www.weatherzone.com.au/news/antarctic-interior-posts-coldest-april-to-september-on-record/535178
Other hypotheses are available.
Oh dear, cherry-picking data! When are you going to get serious?
Goodness me, did you not read the rest of the article about the cold snap in the central Antarctic? Apparently not.
I’d filled in the typeform and hope it gets around the party more widely.
But it is crucial that whatever is chosen is one of the top issues the party pushes forward in the GE.
Not only will it help us electorally, and stop our votes leaking to Greens (in phoning in the 3 recent successful by elections I’ve come across people who really wanted to vote Green, and were talked round to vote tactically, but we won’t have ability in the GE).
But it is the right thing to do, and if we go big on it, it will encourage labour to too. We need the other parties to make it a priority, otherwise nothing will change at government level.
Win every seat, or a majority we can’t. Influence by leading from the front we can.
I’ve also completed the typeform. We could go all out for a hydrogen economy and make this our green issue. It would be timely, progressive and quite sexy. It is also important to emphasise demand management particularly home insulation and heat pumps.
It’s not easy to focus on one aspect of a complicated picture. Demand management in the form of home insulation presents us as doing the tough though necessary. A new process for achieving net zero quickly could be ditching carbon emissions immediately and investing in the green hydrogen economy. A realistic plan for radical increase in tree planting would cement our green credentials. Each of these would need precise funding streams and a detailed time line
There still has been ongoing issues with home insulation’s. I would have thought that the utility companies should be spending some of their vast profits on solar panels for homes.
We have an economy built on how much can be made in profits without any investment.
Is dumping raw sewage into the rivers and waterways a green issue, before long it will find it’s way into the food chain.
Hotels, getting filled up with more and more immigrants. The consumption of energy must be fantastic as it’s payed by the tax payer.
I ask if any political party will be able to get some sense out of this ongoing situation.
1.Use less
2. make sure what you do use is from renewables/nuclear, not from fossil fuels.
Those two will encompass most of what needs to be done, are easily understandable on the doorstep and give people a route to improve their own footprint year on year, with personal reductions each year its do-able, but may not be comfortable, individuals will have to make choices, adapt their lifestyles and give up afew things, we are not good at doing that voluntarily. Time for some incentives?
Croplands having the greatest median solar potential of approximately 28 W/m2 if converted to an agrivoltaic system. Salisbury Plain Training Area measures 380 km2.
offering 10 GW of energy potential, approximately the total installed in the UK by 2019. Would the military establishment be interested in selling the land? Solar is the fastest renewable energy to install.
Promote catalytic synthesis of ammonia using renewably sourced electricity and allow the continued use of internal combustion engine vehicles run on ammonia. Ammonia is much easier to store in liquid form than hydrogen and as a medium for storing renewable energy is more efficient than storing electricity using current battery technology.
Use less fossil fuel every year. Repurpose discretionary fossil fuel use (aviation, cars, etc) to producing renewable energy. Significantly decrease inequality – the people will not put up with having less while the “elite” are swanning about in private jets and eating fillet steak etc.
Given the timescales in which progress and real change is going to be necessary – both to avoid the worst excesses and to address the changes that are already in motion, I suspect the real focus of governments over the coming decade will be the taking of what many today would regard as dragonian decisions that will effectively destroy the current fossil fuel based economy – akin to fighting a war, whilst potentially fighting real wars over our access to food and other essential resources.
So given the potential timing of the next election and recent experience of Brexit, CoViD, and the Lettuce “financial statement”, I suggest the big issues are trust (in the politicians) and credibility (of their plans).
Targets as political commitments are usually a substitute for a properly thought-out plan and should be avoided.
Targets may be attractive to some as virtue signalling, eg, “we will do X by 20YY at the latest”. The advantage is that a politician can sound forceful and determined while the actual outcome Is safely remote. Even if the politician who made the original promise is still around in 20YY responsibility is easily evaded, “In the Y years since we planned X circumstances have changed in ways no-one could have foreseen.”
But the big drawback is that targets are not a plan. Good plans should stay relevant by responding flexibly to changing circumstances, but targets introduce rigidities which weaken plans. The risk is they become dinosaurs in a mammals’ world. For example, civil servants or others, faced with a high-profile political commitment, are strongly incentivised to keep pushing towards that target and hence to respond inflexibly when changed circumstances dictate that the plan should change to match.