Unlock the publisher's digest free
Roula Khalaf, editor -in -chief of the FT, selects her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Sir Keir Starmer was forced to defend the British government's “net zero” carbon emissions on Wednesday after the criticism of the policy of former Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair.
Blair warned in a report published Tuesday by his reflection group that it was necessary to reset the “irrational” debate on zero net policies. In his preface to the Tony Blair Institute report, he argued that attempts to eliminate short -term fossil fuels were “dedicated to failure” given the growing demand for oil, gas and coal in the world.
Blair had added that voters were invited to make “financial sacrifices and lifestyle changes” which would have a “minimal” effect on global emissions, and said that a public reaction could “derail the whole of the agenda”.
The report suggests that political decision -makers should rather continue technological solutions such as carbon capture and storage.
On Wednesday, during the Prime Minister's questions, Sammy Wilson, a deputy for the DUP, blamed Net Zero policies for thousands of jobs lost in Scotland, as well as higher trade and trade failures in Spain.
“Does he not recognize that his own clear zero policy is not only bad, but that it is crazy, and indeed her own former leader now accepts this?” He said to the House of Commons.
Starmer replied that the government already made many measures recommended by Blair, such as investments in carbon capture and greater use of artificial intelligence. “If you look at the details of what Tony Blair said he was actually aligned with what we are doing here, these are the jobs and the security of the future.”
The Prime Minister also urged deputies not to “arm the difficult position” against people in Spain.
Spanish officials and engineers are still trying to determine why there was a catastrophic failure of electricity supply on Monday, which raised urgent questions about the resilience of network infrastructure across Europe while governments are heading for the decarbonization of their electrical systems.
The intervention of Blair, who was the British Prime Minister for a decade until 2007, represents the last sign of fragmentation of the political consensus on the way of fighting climate change.
The conservative chief Kemi Badenoch argued in March that the reduction of net carbon emissions from the United Kingdom to zero by 2050 was an “impossible” task, and that the objective could not be achieved “without a serious drop in our living standards or by going bankrupt”.
A work figure described Blair's intervention as a “very useless …
“As the Prime Minister said last week, the clean energy mission is in the DNA of this government because it is the path to energy security, lower bills and good jobs for our country,” said Desnz.
Critics have stressed that Blair's customers had included the government of Saudi Arabia, one of the largest producers of fossil fuels in the world.
Carla Denyer, co-leader of the Green Party, said: “Tony Blair decided to imitate Nigel Farage on Net Zero and it looks like he was talking on behalf of Petro States like Saudi Arabia and Kazakhstan for whom he put pressure on for more years than the Prime Minister.”
The TBI tried to calm the government on Wednesday by saying that the approach of ministers to capture carbon, with new nuclear and intelligent networks was “the right one”.
“The report is clear that we support the zero net objectives of the 2050 government, to give certainty to investors and innovators who can develop these new solutions and make them deployable,” said the reflection group.
Prime Minister’s spokesman said Starmer had welcomed the TBI “supporting the government's approach”.
The TBI lists the United Kingdom of the Office of Foreigners, Commonwealth and Development as one of its main “donors and financing partners” in its last set of accounts.
Dale Vince, the entrepreneur Green Energy who gave the workforce more than 5 million pounds sterling for his electoral campaign last year, described Blair's argument as “nonsense”.
“He says that we need less concentration on renewable energies and more on carbon capture-one is cheap and abundant and prevents carbon emissions, the other is an incredibly expensive way to try to face emissions,” he said. “Prevention – green energy – is always better and cheaper than healing. Net zero is in fact the economic opportunity of the century. ”
