For most of the past 15 years, Britain’s approach to climate policy has rested on a rare political consensus.
The 2008 Climate Change Act passed with cross-party support; the target of net zero by 2050 was backed by all major parties; and successive governments made the case that decarbonisation could underpin economic renewal as well as environmental responsibility. That unity once gave the UK global credibility – proof that climate action could transcend partisan divides. But that consensus is beginning to fray.
The reasons are as much political as economic. The phrase “net zero”, once a marker of ambition and leadership, has become a point of contention. What was designed as a clear policy goal has come to feel abstract, bureaucratic and, for some, imposed. In an age of rising energy bills, uneven regional investment and growing distrust in institutions, the language of long-term carbon targets can sound detached from daily life.
That detachment matters. Climate policy depends on public consent over decades, not just electoral cycles. When households do not see tangible benefits – lower bills, better jobs, cleaner air – the political space for sustained action narrows. Across Europe, governments have discovered how quickly support can erode when green measures are perceived as unfair or imposed from above.
In France, for example, the gilets jaunes movement began as a revolt against a fuel tax framed as environmental policy, but quickly became symbolic of a deeper resentment towards distant, technocratic decision-making. The lesson was clear: when people feel acted upon rather than involved, even well-intentioned reforms can falter. Britain’s own debate now risks following the same path, as parties argue not over the destination but over who pays for the journey.
At the same time, the evidence for the benefits of the transition is stronger than ever. Clean power is now the cheapest source of energy. The green economy is creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and driving regional growth. The transition offers a route to greater energy security and industrial renewal. Yet these gains are often obscured by the complexity of the policy landscape and by a narrative that has struggled to connect with everyday concerns.
With Reform leading in the polls, even the UK’s commitment to net zero can no longer be taken for granted. The rise of parties sceptical of climate targets has exposed how brittle public consent can be when progress feels remote or unfair. Against that backdrop, a deeper question has emerged: has the way we talk about net zero stopped working?
If the language of targets and transitions no longer resonates, what kind of story – and what kind of politics – will be needed to rebuild trust and carry the country forward?
Pippa Heylings MP, Liberal Democrat spokesperson for energy and net zero
The British public wants more action on climate change, not less. Fact. Polling from multiple sources confirms this. Across the country, people want to do more to protect their environment and understand the threat of climate change. As 16-year-old Zara wrote to me, “we want to build the climate future, not just inherit it.”
It’s about agency, and that is what we need to get right: bringing people with us and making them an active part of this journey, which is both the greatest economic opportunity of the century and an environmental and moral imperative.
This year marks ten years since the historic Paris Agreement, when almost every nation on Earth agreed to act together to limit global warming. The UK played a central role in shaping that deal, building on years of domestic leadership and cross-party consensus through the Climate Change Act. We must recognise how far we have come and what we have achieved in a short time.
The UK’s climate story is one of progress and opportunity: greater energy security, jobs for the future, and lower costs. Wind power alone cut at least £104 billion from UK energy costs between 2010 and 2023.
The green economy is booming, growing three times faster than the wider economy, supporting around one million jobs and generating £83 billion in GVA in 2024. Yet households and businesses are not feeling these benefits. The problem is not the vision but the fairness and affordability of delivery. That is why the Liberal Democrats have set out plans to break the link between gas and electricity prices and cut bills by half within the next decade.
At COP30, the UK can lead again with pragmatism and a politics of hope, delivering a just transition that brings prosperity, fairness and energy security to every community.
Lord Deben, chair of Sancroft and former chair of the Climate Change Committee
Net zero doesn’t ring with anyone. It’s admirably precise, but it’s a technocrats’ phrase. Its achievement is entirely necessary but the phrase doesn’t resonate.
We need, instead, to talk about the things that affect ordinary lives. The narrative must be down-to-Earth. It’s not net zero, but simply that we want to move as quickly as possible away from expensive gas, which pushes up our energy bills. Our home-grown energy from renewables is the cheapest way to heat our homes. If we don’t change we’ll all go on paying more. That’s what other people are doing. Even China has realised this, and they’re going full tilt for renewables.
If we don’t get on with the change, we’ll price ourselves out of the market and lose all the jobs and investment coming to the UK because, having the Climate Change Act, investors know we’re serious about getting rid of expensive and dirty fossil fuels.
The only bit of Britain that is growing is the green bit – new jobs, new industry, and cleaner air. That’s the key point about our home-grown energy. It’ll stop children dying from air pollution; it helps us clean up our seas and rivers; it’s the basis for recovering nature. Those dirty cars pump out poison at exactly the level at which we wheel our babies. Going electric is essential for our health – and the health of our land and our seas. It was Britain that pioneered the first Industrial Revolution. We now need to lead in this new one.
Of course it costs to change – just like it costed to build railways and factories 200 years ago – but it’s much more expensive to stay where we are. The scientists may call it “net zero” but for us it’s a cleaner, safer, greener, cheaper Britain.
Alexander Gray, deputy director for external affairs, Energy UK
Maintaining a political consensus around long-term targets is fundamental for the private sector. The success of the UK’s energy transition to date is in large part because of its geography, which has accommodated world-leading offshore wind capacity.
But political leadership over almost two decades has also been essential. Millions of pounds a day are being invested in the energy transition, which currently supports around one in 25 jobs, from Cornwall to north-east Scotland. This investment is moving us towards a more secure energy system, powered at home, reducing our reliance on fuel imports.
All households have felt the impact of the energy crisis since 2022. Gas, which sets the marginal price of electricity most of the time in the UK, remains around 80 per cent more expensive than pre-crisis. Now, and in the coming years, additional “non-commodity” costs are also being added which are increasing energy bills further. These pay for essential things like grid upgrades, supporting renewable energy or energy insulation for vulnerable households.
Where these costs fall, however, is largely a political choice that, to date, has seen successive governments use the energy bill like a credit card.Poll after poll shows people are supportive of building out clean power, but that support fades in the short term when the benefits aren’t felt soon enough. It is always right in a democracy to question and challenge government decisions over where these costs land, whether that be on the bill or in general taxation.
The energy industry is invested in benefiting society. Clean energy is the way the world is going, and it simply makes economic sense. But if support is to be sustained, households and businesses have to feel the benefits sooner. Government needs to look seriously at who pays and how.
Lindy Fursman, director, climate and energy policy, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change
When Reform mocks “net stupid zero” and voters agree, we have a problem – not only a policy and scientific one, but a political and communications one that risks undermining climate action from within. Policymakers and scientists speak of “Scope 3 emissions” and “1.5°C” while families are focused on bills and jobs. This doesn’t just slow progress, it creates political vulnerabilities that can derail the agenda.
We’ve seen what happens when climate policy loses consent. In Sweden and Germany, backlashes followed climate measures rammed through without local buy-in. In Ontario, excluding communities from wind projects cut local support enough to topple a majority. In France, the gilets jaunes captured it perfectly: “The government worries about the end of the world; we worry about the end of the month.”
A new climate narrative must start with solutions that meet people’s real concerns. It’s not just good politics; it’s the only way to achieve the scale of change the crisis demands.
We need to ground climate action in reality. Instead of only talking about emissions reductions, we should talk about – and deliver – cleaner air and lower energy bills. Instead of promoting electric vehicles as a fix in themselves, we should make owning them feasible through lower electricity costs and plentiful charging infrastructure. Instead of talking about global temperature goals, we must deliver local benefits like jobs and better health.
People won’t “forward-fund on trust” – they’ll back policies that improve life now. Climate action must feel like an upgrade, not a sacrifice. This isn’t about retreating from ambition – it’s about turning responsibility into opportunity.
To win the politics of climate, we must keep the public with us – making the transition affordable, tangible and rooted in lived experience. Only then can we build a future people can see, feel, and believe in.
This article first appeared in Spotlight on Energy and Climate Change, November 2025
Content from our partners
Related