To what extent have the environmental policies of recent governments been 'all talk and no walk'?
- Created by: mariaab
- Created on: 02-05-15 14:39
View mindmap
- To what extent have the environmental policies of recent governments been 'all talk and no action'? 45
- Labour's policies
- Transport
- Their policies weren't coherent. They seemed reluctant to introduce policies.
- Despite commitments to reducing emissions, Brown reduced fuel duty in 2000 - fairly early on.
- They gave the green light for airport expansion.
- They offered incentives of up to £5000 to purchase an electric car and congestion charges were introduced in London to disincentivise high levels of driving.
- International Agreements
- Can be said they were international leaders having played a key role in the Kyoto agreement and Rio de Janeiro treaty
- Kyoto 1997 specified that greenhouse gas emissions should be cut to 1990 levels
- For the US this was 7%, the EU 6% and Japan 6%
- Kyoto became legally binding in 2005.
- However, the Copenhagen treaty was a farce. No global targets for emission reductions by 2050, it was not legally binding and those who did pledge to cut emissions set targets at the lower end of their range.
- Background
- Before the 1997 election, New Labour didn't focus greatly on the environment in their campaigning focusing instead on areas such as the NHS and education.
- Tony Blair did criticise other government s for their lack of action to tackle the climate change.
- There were no sweeping statements, unlike the Conservatives/Coalition like 'vote blue, go green' or 'we'll be the greenest government ever'.
- In that respect that wasn't much 'talk'.
- Transport
- Coalition policies
- Transport
- Decision not to tax planes directly per flight but instead remain with the system its paid per person demonstrates the party's inability to put the environment before party popularity.
- Similarly the decision to scrap air passenger duty for under 12's further demonstrates this point/
- Taxing the planes directly would have reduced the number of planes flying half full which would have reduced emissions.
- The network of charging points for electrical cars, 9000 of them, put forward under Labour were scrapped.
- This as done fairly on in the coalition, suggesting they were all talk no action early on.
- Airport expansion has not gone ahead suggesting the coalition are concerned about the environmental impact.
- However, airport expansion is still being considered. It keeps being delayed and will not be addressed until after the 2015 election.
- With the fall in oil prices the fuel price escalator was abandoned. This was designed to limit driving and raise revenue for green policies.
- The coalition has spent £15bn on road expansion. Again not doing anything to reduce car use and emissions.
- Decision not to tax planes directly per flight but instead remain with the system its paid per person demonstrates the party's inability to put the environment before party popularity.
- Energy
- There has been a move towards wind power, which the UK is the 6th largest producer. There has been investment in off shore wind farms with investment from the Green Investment Bank.
- However, not building onshore wind farms is purely political to appease the NIMBYs
- Clegg: Osborne is a 'blue roadblock to green growth'.
- While wind has been favoured, solar has been disregarded. Payments slashed from £1100 to £630. 25p to 16p per KWh.
- To ensure energy security, the coalition has turned to gas and oil which requires fracking - large scale damage to environment.
- The coalition has invested in 30 new major works.
- Cameron claimed it would be 'good for the uk' and blamed a 'lack of understandig' for opposition.
- Kevin Anderson, deputy director of Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research: 'we are heading towards a global temperature rise of 4C to 6C century; we we want to get off this trajectory, shale gas needs to stay in the ground'.
- Despite the threat nuclear power poses, the coalition, while not building them, they're allowing private firms to build them.
- The coalition have been investing in CCS.
- The first project at Longannet was scrapped in 2011 for being over budget.
- CCS has the possibility to capture up to 90% of emissions, but CCS isn't vastly green as it detracts from the need to convert quickly to renewable energy.
- Greenpeace: 'CCS is being used as a justification to keep building inefficient poorly constructed coal fired power stations'.
- There has been a move towards wind power, which the UK is the 6th largest producer. There has been investment in off shore wind farms with investment from the Green Investment Bank.
- Background
- In the 2010 election, the Conservative party appeared to take on a green stance, claiming 'vote blue, go green'
- When the coalition was formed they promised to be the 'greenest government ever'.
- There was quite a lot of 'talk'.
- Green Investment Bank
- It was set up in 2012 to help generate investment for renewable energy (specially offshore wind farms) from private companies.
- The government placed £3.6bn into into.
- One of a kind, no other country has anything similar.
- It made a loss in it's first year of £5.7 million
- NGOs have criticised the bank for lack ambition and funding.
- Caroline Flint: 'Cameron's promise to run the greenest government ever is falling apart'.
- There cross party consensus that the GIB is a good idea/
- Caroline Flint: 'Cameron's promise to run the greenest government ever is falling apart'.
- Transport
- Labour's policies
Similar Government & Politics resources:
Teacher recommended
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made