Speaking at the Living in a Low Carbon World Conference this week, Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary Peter Ainsworth revealed the opposition’s plan for the environment: an altogether non-controversial plan to turn carbon emissions into commodities that can be trade, and changing the tax system so that polluters pay for their eco-crimes.
He went on a self professed “rant” about the current government’s treatment of climate change, arguing that they do not have a logical, consistent and coherent environmental policy (I’m not a linguist but I think that he used three words that pretty much mean the same thing). Despite this repetition, he deliver a few well-placed jabs to the current government:
- Government departments are less carbon efficient than ten years ago,
- They have introduced biofuels without consulting the electorate
- and they’re planning to build a new generation of coal power stations.
Ainsworth also wants to hand the eco-planning baton back to the average Joe, giving communities and local councils more freedom in choosing how they wish to tackle the issue of climate change, particularly focusing on the current regulations around new buildings.
He also said that “it’s not a politician’s role to tell us how to live”, which is odd, given that’s almost entirely what they do – after all, what are laws for? In the case of climate change, I wonder if taking this sort of hands off approach to climate change at a high level is only going to lead to disaster?
After all, isn’t it just that sort of light touch approach from worldwide governments that’s lead to businesses polluting with gay abandon in the first place?