The Skidmore review
Chris Skidmore has been a Conservative MP since 2010.
In 2022 he was asked to write a report on climate change.
Questions: What’s the problem? How dangerous is it? What can we do?
(Answers: Fossil fuels. Extremely dangerous. Plenty, but we need to get going.)
The Skidmore review is important. Fundamentally important.
Our MP, and our PM, should read it!
Chris Skidmore is the chair of the Net Zero Review and was presenting his report. Our government established the review last year to examine net zero – how necessary is it, can we do it and what will it cost? (The answers were 1. Absolutely essential. 2. Yes, we can. 3. It’s not a cost but an opportunity.)
The final report is some 130 pages; it reaches conclusions and offers solutions. Here’s our summary of the debate and executive summary. A link to the report itself is here.
Mr Skidmore said that the remit of the review was “To allow us to understand how we can transition to net zero in a more affordable, efficient manner that is pro-business and pro-growth”. It is an admirable document, impeccably Conservative and nothing for a Tory to fear.
What did Mr Skidmore conclude?
Wide consultation had taken place and “The message from the overwhelming majority of respondents was that when it comes to the opportunities that net zero and energy transition can bring to the UK, Westminster, Whitehall and Government are falling behind the curve. Thousands of infrastructure projects are ready to take place, and thousands of businesses see the opportunity in net zero.”
Two wonderfully opposed concepts were deployed - “net zero” or “not zero”. As one MP said: “We are at a crossroads…. Ultimately the choice of not zero will cost more than … net zero. That is the choice.”
Mr Skidmore pointed out that not zero would be highly damaging, environmentally and socially, but also that it would be profoundly financially harmful. He said that “net zero is the primary economic opportunity of this century, but if we do not invest now … we will turn our backs on a potential £1 trillion of investment by 2030 and on up to 480,000 jobs by 2035.” Net zero really is the economic opportunity of our lifetimes and it really can’t be described as a cost!
During the debate it was agreed that the government is not doing enough to promote net zero and is still promoting not zero (e.g. the licensing of new fossil fuel fields). This was described as a “slam dunk fail”. Until now the Government has “overpromised and underdelivered. We have missed opportunities for investment in renewables and the Government’s biggest investment is still in oil and gas exploration. The private sector is ready to invest in net zero, but it needs certainty, clarity, consistency”.
It was chillingly noted that international competition is already up and running – the EU and the US are heavily investing in net zero and if we don’t match this we’ll fall further and further behind. We’ll be customers rather than producers; clients, not entrepreneurs. Our brains will drain, and we’ll be reduced to bidding to make a few parts for the shining new technologies being developed elsewhere. We’ll be bit-players in, and spectators of, the new industrial revolution.
Our MP claims we’re world-beating environmentalists, but this is no longer remotely true. As Wera Hobhouse (Lib Dem Bath) pointed out: at the present rate we are “on course to overshoot our target level of greenhouse gas emissions twofold” and only one fifth of the Government targets have been achieved: “an unforgivable underperformance showing that the Conservative Government’s commitment to net zero is lukewarm at best…. It has to be hot and passionate.” “The transition to net zero must be at the heart of every Government policy”, and we need “a net zero delivery authority, as recommended in the report, and continuity from the Government on policy”.
The report sets out “ten 10-year missions” designed to bring the requisite “long-term vision of programmatic certainty” for investment between 2025 and 2035 irrespective of government changes. This provides a road map for government towards net zero, which the report shows is essential, and away from not zero, which the report demonstrates will be deeply harmful. Government action must be far more radical and far more rapid. For example: “The sooner we act, the sooner we will be able to achieve net zero in an affordable and efficient manner.” And “If we delay action on net zero by 10 years, we add on 23 base points of GDP to our public debt”.
Skidmore spoke to a lot of stakeholders and found the overwhelming majority to be either on board or eager to come aboard – all they need is for government to provide a positive and consistent business environment to enable and encourage investment in net zero rather than not zero. As described by Mr Skidmore’s report, it’s a ‘no-brainer’.
A small but encouraging point was made: “The Government decided not to challenge the High Court judgment that their net zero strategy was illegal, and they have agreed … to respond to the High Court judgment and the Committee on Climate Change by 31 March”.
They have been “falling behind the curve” recently – if they read this (their own) report, perhaps they’ll pick up the challenge and choose net against not?
In view of this suddenly positive but thoroughly Conservative review, what can we do?
We can write to our MP, Robert Courts. Most of his constituents will agree with the findings in Mr Skidmore’s review, and Mr Courts needs to know this, and act on it. Unless we tell him, he won’t.
Let’s all write!
or The Rt. Hon. Robert Courts MP, House of Commons, London SW1A 1AA
or The Rt. Hon. Robert Courts MP, Waterloo House, 58-60 High Street, Witney, OX28 6HJ
