Bill McGuire – The Curious Arrival of Climate Change in Politics

Although this article is specifically about Britain we are going to see more and more of this sort of posturing in the EU. Even one of the great endemically corrupt sell out parties in Europe, the Austrian Social Democrats, are intorducing a Green New Deal – of course just before the EU elections.

There had been no climate debate in Parliament for two years then one that was barely attended. Now House of Commons has declared a ‘climate emergency’. Bill McGuire asks what is going on, if MPs understand the implications and whether logical actions will follow.

Bill McGuire is Professor Emeritus of Geophysical & Climate Hazards at UCL, and a co-director of the New Weather Institute. His current book is Waking the Giant: how a changing climate triggers earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanoes.

Cross-posted from New Weather Institute

Just a few days ago, in Parliament, politicians jostled like small children for the best seats, in advance of a much-lauded speech by a climate activist. Perhaps entirely appropriate as the speaker, Swedish schoolgirl, Greta Thunberg, had previously damned the international political class as lacking the maturity to recognise the climate emergency for what it was and to take effective measures to tackle it. Those present sat submissively, as if at a dressing-down from the Head Teacher, and at the end gave a standing ovation, praising the schoolgirl for her single-handed transformation of the climate change debate. Even Michael Gove expressed his admiration and acknowledged the guilt he felt on behalf of his generation.

It was an extraordinary and unique event and, coming close on the heels of the Extinction Rebellion demonstrations and the recent David Attenborough film on climate change, it has helped to build the feeling that we might be reaching a tipping point, beyond which decision-makers will at last walk-the-walk on addressing climate breakdown. Based upon the record of recent Conservative Party rule, it is something that’s desperately needed, but there is – as yet – no indication whatsoever that government is planning to alter course from a policy that undermines green initiatives and underpins fossil fuels. In this light, it is hardly a surprise that Theresa May was the only party leader to shun Thunburg. Meanwhile, the government’s response to Extinction Rebellion’s demands was to call for ‘the full force of the law’ to be brought against them, and the boast that the UK is already a world leader in addressing climate breakdown; the unspoken implication being that it didn’t need to do any more. This, however, is patent nonsense.

UK Greenhouse gas emissions are broadly on a downward trend, if far too slowly to prevent a climate catastrophe, much of it driven by the demise of King Coal and it’s replacement by lower carbon and renewable energy which, of course, is a one-off win, and this has happened largely in spite of government policy rather than because of it. Over the course of the last two Conservative-led governments, onshore wind power has been de-facto banned, solar subsidies scrapped, a commitment to zero-carbon new homes dumped, electric car grants reduced and the Swansea Bay tidal scheme given the thumbs down. At the same time, a third Heathrow runway has been green lighted, along with a new coal mine in the North East, oil subsidies have been increased, and fracking encouraged across the board. This is not the signature of a country leading the world in the battle against climate breakdown. It is the mark of a government that pays nothing more than lip service to tackling the climate emergency, and then only when it suits or there is no other alternative.

Furthermore, the touted fall in UK greenhouse gas emissions is nowhere near as impressive as first appears. True, UK domestic emissions have fallen more – over the past three decades – than those of any other major economy, but this is far from the complete picture. The collapse of manufacturing has resulted in a big chunk of production-related emissions being ‘offshored’ to countries like China. Figures for 2015 (the last year for which consumption-related emissions are available), reveal that while domestic CO2 emissions were down by 191.5 million tonnes (on 1990 levels), consumption-related emissions fell by just 62.4 million tonnes. Furthermore, domestic emissions fail to include those generated by both international aviation and shipping – both of which are growing rapidly.

Looking ahead, the path to an 80 percent cut in emissions by 2050 – the existing target enshrined in law – looks increasingly out of reach. The relative success in decarbonising the UK energy market, which has accounted for three-quarters of emissions cuts since 1990, has masked failures in all other areas. So, the agriculture, housing, transport, waste and industry sectors, have either seen small falls in emissions, flat-lined or grown. In fact, last year, the government’s own Committee on Climate Change (CCC) announced that it was failing to meet emissions reduction targets across 15 out of 18 sectors – a pretty damning verdict.

Now the CCC has said that the UK needs to hit net zero emissions by 2050, to stand any chance of meeting the goal of limiting the global average temperature rise to 1.5°C (from pre-industrial levels). Given the records of the last two governments, it is hard to see – whatever the target date – how it can be met without action that is commensurate with being in a state of climate emergency. I am not – at the moment – hopeful. Responding to an opposition demand for the declaration of a Climate Emergency, Claire Perry, the Energy Minister, said ‘I don’t know what that would entail.’ Now that just such a declaration has been made by Parliament, she will have to find out pretty fast. In a strange alignment of the stars on the very day of the vote to declare an emergency, the High Court dismissed claims against the expansion of Heathrow policy. Labour Party spokespeople took to the airwaves to defend new coal mines and their Conservative equivalents did the same to defend aviation expansion. As if to rub home all the ironies, also on the same day, professional cycling’s most successful team switched sponsorship to be supported by the fracking company Ineos, and there were reports that Indonesia was considering moving its sinking capitol, Jakarta.

An understandable euphoria has greeted the late arrival of climate breakdown at the top of the political and public agenda. But, the great danger now is that if, after declaring a climate emergency, politicians simply find excuses at every turn to continue with business as usual the public may be left with the impression that the problem is in hand, even as we continue to speed toward the climate cliff edge.

If you like this kind of article and want to see more writing free of state or corporate media bias and free of charge, please donate here. We welcome your support.

2 Comments

  1. Climate politics has come off age then, at least in the affluent and overwrought party political theatres which play to the politically correct avant garde in the old West. One cannot be sure, looking through the glass from a certain distance, whether this is a case of “from the mouths of babes, etc.”, as in kinder und narren sagen die wahrheit, or a epic phenomenon in the vein of Martin Luther’s I will give you children for princes and loudmouths for masters, but this is certainly indicative of the necessity for another look at Marxist dialectic activism. The materialistic dialectic analyses of the socio-economic, psycho-social and sociopolitical structures of the reigning paradigm will show diverse broad lateral scope and depths to be exposed and treated with in accord with the standard Marxist measure or a variation thereof, but perhaps the historical tectonic plates in global political terms have shifted sufficiently since Marxist theory gained a foothold in the minds of progressive political activists to warrant an extension of the practical implications in theory and, in hindsight, a re-ordering of the theoretical framework as applied to activist political praxis.
    In other words, the negation of the political theories underpinning the reigning paradigm and the implied and expressed dialectic dedicated to the negation in fact of the materialistic basis of the reigning paradigm now calls for the negation of the negation lest the fruit of the activist work be negated before the reigning theoretical and materialistic paradigm is negated.
    Essentially, one needs to sort the true dialectic from the false one, and apply the negative to the negation in order to obtain the positive result. The overthrow of the reigning paradigm being paramount, the thrust of the climate change action in the political theatre must be actioned in such a way as to undermine the economic rationale of the reigning post-capitalist post-hoc democratic revivalist rhetoric so as to deflate the proto-liberal new world order political soufflé.
    Briefly, Marxist political activism in the affluent West is close to undoing decades of dedicated activist preparatory work by negating the work before the job is completed. To wit: The reigning paradigm is getting a handle on the subversive influences of climate activism, educational Marxist dedactic operations and growing bureaucratic excrescences by feeding off them and weakening the case for social-democratic governance based on a modern version of the dictatorship of the proletariat in favour of a globalist corporate faux nation-state franchising hierarchical structure which would prevent for ages the implementation of the true socialist Internationale. A change of direction in climate change activism is in order to save the day for the socialist ideal. Post-capitalist oligarchic globalised kleptocratic rule is close to becoming an established fact. In the West it is getting close to being too late to forestall the full establishment of kleptocratic oligarchic rule. Climate change activism should be geared to pull the plug on uneconomic growth and the artificial whipping up of money supply. Deflation and a shrinking economy should be paramount in the focus of Marxist activist political practices. To that end, Marxist dialectical theory should be enhanced and put to work by those those engaged at the coal face of Marxist practical applications wherever they be.

    • Further, upon reflection, though I know little about Marxist dialectic theory, nor wish to study same except where it emerges and manifests in mainstream dialogue, I dare say if Marxism does not analyse and expound on cooption of professed Marxist and other Leftist activists to the cause of capitalism/liberal so-called democracy, the which does never seem to get a mention in the MSM, as opposed to cooption of the enemy to the cause of Marxism, communism/socialism, there ought to be. These days, and long since, Marxist activists, scribes and general theorists, along with most of the Left of political life, high and low, are very much embedded in roles supporting post-capitalist globalised corporatist oligarchic kleptocracy. Under the guise of Marxist- and general left-leaning politics, the Left is happily ensconced in the Establishment’s cradle, being rocked contentedly by the Establishment’s tune in harmony with the Leftist political counter-tune. Is support for a transnational corporate globalisation new world order the road to Marxist rule and/or the socialist Internationale? Is Marxism a fudge? Was it always? Surely Marx himself was the genuine article. Is Marxism become just another useful ruse to help befuddle the masses with ideology while the clever political operatives make hay? Just now, it looks to me as if the entire political Left is getting past its use-by date from a socialist perspective.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*