Liz Truss and her Cabinet vs Fuel Insecurity and Climate Change

Putins decision to shut down oil and gas pipelines to Europe has had widespread and devastating effects in the UK. With rising fuel costs and concerns over black-outs this upcoming winter, the need to reduce the UK’s dependency on limited fuel resources has never been more urgent. These crises comes at a time when the need to limit global warming and climate change has also never been more urgent. This article explores Liz Truss and her cabinet’s stances on these issues, and their long-term solutions for the UK. 

Fuel Security and the Climate Crisis in Britain

The recent fuel crisis, caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has bought the UK to its knees. It has had knock on effects on the economy, exacerbated the cost of living crisis and has meant millions this upcoming winter of discontent will have to choose between fuel or food. In the long term the UK must be energy secure so that economic stability and prosperity are not slave to erratic foreign leaders.

The government’s UK Energy Security Strategy explained the UK must move away from “expensive fossil fuel prices set by global markets we cannot control”, in April this year. 

Reducing our fossil fuel usage is not only vital for fuel security and the economy, but also the environment.

Climate change is occurring faster than scientists predicted it would be 10 years ago, and the impacts are being felt in every country across the globe. The climate crisis is affecting every countries health and economy, and should therefore be pivotal to every governments agenda.

Britain has committed to having net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 as part of a wider global effort to limit global warming to no more than 1.5C. Many climate scientists say that missing these targets will have severe and irreversible long term consequences on the environment.

One significant reason the conservative party won the election in 2019 is the net zero initiatives outlined in their manifesto. In fact a think tank conducted in April this year suggested they could lose 1.3 million voters in the next election if they drop their net zero initiatives. On her Conservative leadership campaign, Liz Truss promised she would “double down” on the UK’s target of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

The Conservative Environment Network, which has the support of half the Tory backbench believes that commitment to net zero is essential in reducing our “our dependency on dubious regimes for energy”.

Going carbon neutral, is not only important for the UK’s economy, for humanity and the environment, but also for political appraisal and popularity. With all this in mind it would be fair to assume Truss and her cabinet would emphasise a push towards carbon neutrality whilst ensuring long term fuel security at the same time. 

Liz Truss – Former Environment Secretary and Current Prime Minister

From 2014-16, David Cameron placed Truss as secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs – a role which entails policy making and lobbying for policies surrounding sustainable development and climate change. 

During her tenure she worked hard to promote ‘British products’ making it easier for farmers to produce food in an effort to encourage the economic growth of the food and drink industry.

In 2015 she boasted of “an 80% reduction in red tape from DEFRA”, a policy which involved cutting farm inspections. The number of farm inspections reduced so much that the 106,000 farm businesses in England can now expect an inspection every 263 years. 

This made it easier for farmers to ignore regulations, which has unsurprisingly had detrimental effects on the environment. It is easier for farmers to dump toxic waste, like pesticides and faeces, into the UK’s rivers. In the winter of 2016 it was found that 95% of farms along the River Axe had not observed slurry storage regulations and 49% were polluting the river.

During her time as environment secretary Truss showed desire for a strong economy and willingness to ignore the environmental consequences of her policies, and it seems many of her advisors and cabinet have a similar mindset. 

Jacob Rees-Mogg – Business Secretary 

Former Cabinet member of Boris Johnson, Rees-Mogg was appointed business secretary by Truss. The role entails oversight of science, research and innovation in policies including those relating to climate change, energy security and deregulation.

In today’s world the business secretary must carefully balance economic growth and stability with global climate goals and the overall strive towards becoming net zero. 

His past comments show his relaxed attitude towards the urgency of preventing climate change, in October 2021 he stated “We are not going for net zero tomorrow – 2050 is a long way off”. 

He is a big proponent for fossil fuels, and in 2016 he was one of 100 Conservative MPs who successfully wrote to Cameron pressuring him to remove subsidies on on-shore wind farms,   which made planning for them much more difficult. This lead to an 84% decline in the number of new projects from 2016 to 2019. 

He also financially profits from a controversial North American oil and coal mining company which he has invested in through an investment company he founded called Somerset Capital Management.

Whilst the majority of climate scientists agree that using untapped fossil fuel resources will massively hinder the net-zero 2050 target, he spoke of removing “every last drop” of North Sea Oil because it “doesn’t have a knock on effect on net zero”, and has previously stated his intentions to make fracking licenses easier to obtain. 

He believes the UK’s carbon neutrality targets increase energy prices – which could also explain why he favours fossil fuels. 

He wants to resume fracking not only because he believes it is cheaper but also “It’s more environmentally friendly to use gas that you’ve got at hand than to import liquefied gas from the rest of the world.”

Rees-Mogg has repeatedly shown skepticism in the effects that CO2 emissions have on the environment, a topic which he claims “remains much debated”. In the past he has said it is unrealistic for scientists to project climate change because meteorologists struggle to predict the weather

His belief in the financial gain, lack of trust in ‘climate alarmism’ explain why he wants to take advantage of the potential economic benefits of North Sea Oil and fossil fuels. 

Similarly to Economic Advisor Matthew Sinclair, he argues we should adapt to environmental changes, rather than mitigate against them as part of a wider global effort to limit climate change. 

Matthew Sinclair – Economic Advisor

Matthew Sinclair, author of ‘Let them Eat Carbon’ and former chief executive of right-wing think tank ‘The Taxpayers Alliance’ was appointed chief economic advisor by Liz Truss. 

Whilst Sinclair believes that climate change is real and does not deny the science behind it, he argues a ‘realist’ approach. 

He believes humanity should simply just respond “to whatever the natural world throws at us” and accept the environmental consequences of our current way of living, rather than mitigating against future damage and destruction through introducing more climate change policies.

“Current environmental policies in many countries will do huge harm to the economy while having little or no effect on carbon emissions.”

He has repeatedly campaigned against green initiatives, reasoning that the UK has “pushed energy efficiency too far, too fast”.

For example, in 2012 he proposed scrapping the Green Investment Bank, which was created to increase investment in the energy sector, because it it could save £2.7 billion pounds.

His book, ‘Let them Eat Carbon’, describes his realist approach in further detail. Tommy Vickerstaff, of 350.org, who campaign for renewable energy, said “It’s deeply disturbing that Sinclair could speak so callously about the suffering being felt by millions of people around the world, and that he now holds such a powerful position in government at a time when making our economies fairer and more sustainable should be a top priority.”

Sinclair is more than willing to put economic prosperity ahead of tackling climate change and seems to think that the two cannot go hand in hand. 

Ranil Jayawardena – Environment Secretary

Despite having no relevant experience in the agriculture or environmental policies, he was appointed as environment secretary by Truss.

His voting history suggests he shares her tendencies to overlook environmental consequences in pursuit of financial growth. 

He voted “not to require ministers to have due regard to the target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 when taking actions including setting up agricultural subsidy schemes”, in October 2020. 

Jayawardena also voted for two failed proposals against laws to slash transport emissions by 2030, and against a proposal to bring “a green industrial revolution to decarbonise the economy and boost economic growth”.

Last year he also voted against DEFRA’s environmental principles which “guide ministers and policymakers towards opportunities to prevent environmental damage and enhance the environment, where relevant and appropriate”.

Similarly to Truss he prioritises profits and produce over long term environmental sustainability and security.

Backlash Since Appointed

Truss has surrounded herself with like minded politicians, who share a similar ideology to her when it comes to tackling the climate crisis. More worryingly, there are people who are in favour of compromising carbon neutrality and net zero targets in favour for short term and costly fuel security from North Sea Oil and fossil fuels.

Whilst campaigning for Tory leadership she openly rejected the idea of removing the barriers set by David Cameron which make planning onshore wind and solar farms difficult. She also promised to lift the ban on fracking, and fulfilled this promise early on by making it easier to get fracking licenses for the North Sea oil and gas fields.

In her short tenure she has faced so much widespread backlash that Labour polled 33 points ahead of the Conservatives. Whilst her most infamous failure has been her ‘mini-budget’, she has also received criticism when it comes to her decisions concerning fuel security and the climate crisis.

The former Conservative environment secretary Lord Deben, currently chair of the Committee on Climate Change, and Sir John Armitt, chair of the National Infrastructure Commission, wrote a joint letter to Truss warning her that increasing fossil fuel production will not solve the fuel crisis. This marks the first time both chairs of these independent advisory committees have written to a Prime Minister together.

They explained that it may improve energy security for the upcoming winter, but both shale and offshore gas reserves ‘are too small to impact meaningfully the prices faced by UK consumers’. 

Instead they advised her and Rees-Mogg to focus on bringing energy demand down from consumers and businesses. 

“Renewables are the cheapest form of electricity generation. Onshore wind and solar have the potential to be deployed fastest and thus reduce our reliance on natural gas sooner,” they wrote.

The Committee on Climate Change warned in April this year that North Sea gas production is unlikely to reduce gas prices and could endanger the UK’s net zero 2050 targets. They also warned it is not economically beneficial for the population.

“Among her first decisions must be a commitment to fund a nationwide home insulation programme and to remove barriers holding back cheap onshore wind and solar energy. She must also rule out fracking, new coal-mines and more North Sea oil and gas extraction.”

“Addressing our dependency on fossil energy offers us the best way out of these crises,” they wrote, referring to both the UK’s fuel insecurity and fuel prices.

Unfortunately for Truss, the undeniable capitalist truth is that renewables are currently much cheaper than the fossil fuel alternatives she has chosen to pursue. They also provide a safer, more reliable long term solution to the UK’s fuel security crisis, whilst also helping the UK work towards its 2050 net zero targets. Shifting from fossil fuels to non renewable fuel sources works for almost everyone – the environment, the economy, those affected by fuel poverty, whilst also providing long term energy security for the UK.