Hugely positive signals from the Prime Minister at #COP29 in Baku today at a time of global instability. In the wake of the US election, the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, and domestic instability across the G7, UK leadership on the climate agenda matters.

Starmer at #cop29: “There is no national security, there is no economic security, there is no global security, without climate security.”

Cost of living remains #1 issue for voters - for the climate community, we have to continue to join dots between eg lower bills and clean power *and* secure cheaper low carbon policy (eg public transport) *and* build salience of the issue as a whole.

“There is a real job on our hands to articulate why all of this [#NetZero] policy matters and translate it back to the lived reality of people in this country,” [Chris Venables, Green Alliance]

Net zero regulations are not the cause of car makers’ woes. George Dibb responds to the latest news on Vauxhall’s planned plant closure and the growing warnings from other car manufacturers about potential job cuts.

🚨1 in 4 cars sold in November were EVs Despite the fuss and drama of the last few weeks, UK EV sales are racing ahead A nice evidence point that the ZEV mandate is working and need not be amended Bloomberg UK Bloomberg New AutoMotive bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

We have some new analysis out today on *the* biggest problem facing English nature conservation… …& increasingly climate goals… …& farm incomes… It’s the befuddling failure of Defra UK to stand up a higher tier land management scheme 🧵… independent.co.uk/climate-change…

How do you want to kick off 2025? 🤔 Why not register to join Climate Outreach, Green Alliance and others to explore what the communications challenges and opportunities will be in 2025! Speakers: - Nameerah Hameed, Advocacy Manager, Climate Outreach - Dr Chris Pollard, Senior

It is starting to look like Labour's political strategists systematically underestimate support for the environmental agenda in core voter groups. They seem to put climate and nature in the 'too difficult' box when it often unites their electoral coalition.

If true, this is not at all good. It'll split the PLP and the Labour mayors (who, quite rightly, want regional expansion), damage a core Lab narrative on climate/growth, unite in opposition a good chunk of its coalition (environmentalists), and all for questionable econ. return.

One would also hope the Treasury is asking questions about impact on economic growth, as Govt figures are highly questionable, and MHCLG is pushing hard on knock-on impacts on regional airport capacity.

Growth assumptions from HM Gov on this highly questionable, so the real question is why No 10 wld green light a policy that actively undermines one of their core political narratives and most successful/popular missions, IE clean power / climate and growth - make it make sense.

As wildfires rage in 🇺🇸 and 1000s of Brits try to rebuild their lives from flooding, the UK Chancellor says climate action is optional - what a dangerous signal to the rest of the world - and a dark day for all those invested in protecting the planet for future generations.

A growth at any cost philosophy is self-defeating. It’s self-defeating economically because any respectable economist these days will tell you that all prosperity and resilience rely on nature. ✍️ Richard Benwell buff.ly/40RsdyH

“For a party that prides itself on taking a Britain-first approach, Reform’s desire to leave the UK reliant on imported natural gas…is not very patriotic.” I wrote about Richard Tice’s war on net zero for The New Statesman (making my morning call debut!) newstatesman.com/politics/uk-po…

It's sometimes said that, for voters, the cause of climate change/Net Zero has become associated with hectoring, middle class puritans and so on. This is not true - neither with voters overall nor swing voters. It's only true for a core of Reform voters. via YouGov. Short 🧵

Nearly 2 years now of anti-Net Zero positioning by the Conservatives. In that time it’s gained them nothing electorally. To the extent voter opinion on Net Zero has moved at all, it’s just split their own coalition. Will anyone ever accept this is simply not genius politics?

Final cost to Gov't of energy support schemes to protect people from gas price spike was £44bn over 2 years, not far off half the full net-cost (~£108bn) of reaching climate targets (according to CCC) by 2050 (over 25 years). nao.org.uk/press-releases… theccc.org.uk/publication/th…

Some rise in opposition from 2023 but still a clear split in favour of net-zero target. Challenge the Tories are facing is their own voters back net-zero by 2050 by a 52-38 margin, not clear at all that ditching the target is a way to rebuild a big tent and risks further splits

Net zero by 2050 is challenging but achievable. It is supported by the scientific community and backed by the independent Climate Change Committee as being not just necessary but feasible and cost-effective. We are already seeing the impact of climate change. From extreme