Technical Judgements
Ultimately, it will be up to neither your correspondent nor the readers of this article to arbitrate on whether the government’s Net Zero strategy holds water.
But the case illustrates some fascinating theory surrounding the policy space and the trust corporates are asked to place in governments providing policy leads on sustainability.
Rather crucial is this New Scientist analysis. It explains that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) turned down a freedom of information request that would allow independent scrutiny of the government plan for Net Zero greenhouse gas emissions.
New Scientist writes that the government refused to release a spreadsheet showing how much its landmark Net Zero strategy will cut carbon emissions for individual measures, such as backing a new nuclear power station and fitting new electric car chargers.
To contextualise; previous government blueprints for decarbonisation, such as the 2020 10-point green plan and 2017 clean growth strategy, have spelled out estimates of exactly how much individual policies will cut emissions. But the Net Zero strategy failed to provide any such breakdown, which observers said showed a lack of transparency that hampered independent scrutiny.
Government officials conceded that there was a spreadsheet containing all the figures, but said they wouldn’t release it. The Department declined the request on the grounds that it involves the disclosure of internal communications.
“Public interest doesn’t outweigh the need to keep such communications private,” said the BEIS FOI team. “We have concluded that the Net Zero strategy itself contains appropriate detail at this stage for the public to engage with our decarbonisation proposals,” they wrote in a letter.
A BEIS spokesperson said: “There is nothing secretive about the UK’s Net Zero strategy, the first of its kind from any major economy. It outlines in detail how we will transition to a green future.” But New Scientist quotes John Sauven at Greenpeace UK: “Ministers are behaving like a shady dealer asking customers to buy a product without seeing it first.” He is calling on BEIS to publish the spreadsheet. “The best thing would be for the government to release the numbers behind the plan and allow experts to kick the tyres on it.”
What Happens Next?
It will be intriguing to see how the case plays out. It is worth remembering that the Climate Change Committee (CCC), the government’s official advisor on sustainability policy, too has issues with the Net Zero strategy.
In its official review, CCC says that for the Net Zero strategy to be a success, key issues will need to be resolved quickly. It says few details have been set out for delivery mechanisms in the agriculture sector – a combined decarbonisation strategy for agriculture and land is urgently needed.
It also says the Government has not yet put forward plans for a Net Zero Test, as it had recommended, to ensure that all policy and planning decisions are consistent with the path to Net Zero.
These are diplomatic words. But there does appear to be a lack of consensus on whether these plans are sufficiently tested and to what criteria.
Corporates across the UK, reasonably enough, are going to want to know. They are being asked to stump up billions to meet Net Zero strategies and legislation and to meet sustainability approaches that demand a reimagining of business from the bottom up.
It is reasonable to hope that the policy lead on all this work is tested, assured and balanced. Further, there is a vast amount of public money being spent on Net Zero adaptation within government estates. This too needs to be transparent and visible against set criteria, so that best practice can be shared and solutions quickly scaled up. Right now, no verdict has been passed either way. But is there no smoke without fire? Time will tell.
SEE ALSO: The Decline of the 9 to 5