Climate diplomacy meets division.

This year’s COP30 comes at a complex time for climate action. Against a backdrop of domestic pressure from parties on the right to abandon the pursuit of net zero and calls from within the Labour party to adopt an electorally pragmatic agenda, the Prime Minister’s attendance signals an intent to show the UK as a global leader in climate action and green growth. 

Climate change scepticism and denial have long featured in British political life but the open and sustained rejection of climate policy by parties on the right appears to be a relatively new phenomenon. Until recently we’ve largely seen robust cross-party support for climate action with the legislation of the Climate Change Act in 2008 backed and pushed for by Cameron’s Conservatives. Subsequently, it was outgoing Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May who deepened the nation’s legally binding commitments under the Act, declaring net zero by 2050 a ‘moral duty’.  

Today a different leader from the same party has pledged to scrap that same commitment. What has changed?  

Clearly, very real inflation of energy prices and the cost of living have created the context while the influence of social media has accelerated the agenda’s reach. The debate has shifted far from May’s moralising terms, but it remains true that the cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of action. So, what is leading the public to form a connection that pursuing net zero is the problem and not the solution?  

Politicians and commentators from the right and those seeking to scale back climate action have popularised the phrase ‘net stupid zero’. We’ve seen members of the Reform UK party driving net zero as the ‘next Brexit’ and whipping up populist sentiment against the notion, amplified by the use of social media. With other rhetoric that leans into nationalist sentiment, the mocking phrase has become a tool for weaponising a competing agenda against climate action, fuelled by economic anxiety and declining trust in politics.  

Despite antagonistic rhetoric, this message struggles when confronted with facts and especially with public opinion. Recent polling by YouGov suggests that support for net zero remains widespread amidst the fracturing political consensus. Indeed, 65% of adults remain "very" or "fairly worried" about climate change and its effects, with 71% believing humans are to blame.  

The challenge remains of defining a vision for net zero that can satisfy climate commitments while pursuing growth that can be seen to benefit everyone without sacrificing living standards. We’ve already seen Labour’s drive for ‘growth’ and ‘renewal’ try to build on positive momentum for the future. Now politicians must also communicate a vision for net zero and our collective future that it is clear and achievable to voters while supporting legal commitments and positive change.  

Speaking in an interview with Prospect, Emma Pinchbeck the executive of the Climate Change Committee has dismissed the rising scepticism around net zero. She sees the economic direction as “an industrial revolution happening at scale. This is not a net zero transition. It is an energy transition”. Pinchbeck’s comments reflect the reality that is left out of populist rhetoric intended to grab headlines and voters. With UK territorial greenhouse gas emissions 54 per cent below the 1990 level and renewable energy overtaking coal as the world's leading source of electricity in the first half of this year, the energy industry is decarbonising, whether you believe in net zero or not. 

COP30 will be in our sights as we watch the Prime Minister’s approach on the international stage and the reaction at home. Will it mark a renewed commitment or a shift in approach?