6 December 2024, 13:22
Picture:
Alamy
Labour has had a poor start since taking office five months ago.
Their priorities have come across as fragmented. They seem to have spent an inordinate amount of time, energy, and political capital on fairly niche issues and scandals rather than tackling the structural issues facing the country.
I argued that Labour’s problem was that it was following rather than setting the agenda, and that if the government was serious about growth and prosperity, it needed to be bolder, think strategically and have a firmer hand on the tiller. In particular, I said that Labour needed to set out – and stick to – a coherent and optimistic narrative about national renewal and economic development.
Well, Keir Starmer’s ‘plan for change’ speech yesterday seems to have done just that. It hit the right notes – particularly on energy and infrastructure. If this was a relaunch and the start of a new way of governing, it should be welcomed.
In this speech, the prime minister set out six targets he wants to be judged against at the next election. One of these was to build 1.5 million homes in England, and to fast-track planning decisions. This focus on building and expediting infrastructure projects is something many entrepreneurs and innovators will welcome.
Another of these milestones was to ‘secure our energy supply with home-grown, clean power’, which he said should be judged by whether the UK is ‘on track to achieving at least 95% of low carbon generation by 2030’.
The 95% target, made on the advice of the National Energy Systems Operator (NESO), and the wording of this mission are important. Previously, the details of this mission had not been clear – and some had incorrectly interpreted this a 100% target.
NESO published its Clean Power 2030 report a month ago, where they had used this 95% definition – but they clarified that the government would set out its own definition in due course.
This is a positive step. 100% clean power by 2030 was a bold, if arbitrary, target that was not necessarily the best course of action. It risked bungling the transition to a green economy and risked creating more problems down the road, at a time when progress is badly needed.
The fastest possible shift to clean power may seem like the morally right thing to do for the environment, but it will be short-sighted if it means the infrastructure is not properly in place for further development and scale-up, or to provide the flexibility to meet future demands.
Let’s be clear – 95% by 2030 is still a bold and arbitrary target, one that the UK should certainly strive for. But having room to manoeuvre is important when the consequences can be so long-lasting.
A rush to meet artificial targets may ultimately be more costly for the environment and damaging for Britain’s competitiveness in terms of industrial electricity costs. It might also continue to burden consumers through high energy bills, already faced with extra costs.
Clean energy is vital, and this argument should not be taken as ammunition for climate change deniers. But taking a little longer to reach clean power is no bad thing if it means doing it right.
________________
Dr Mann Virdee is a senior research fellow in science, technology, and economics at the Council on Geostrategy in London, UK.
LBC Views provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.
To contact us email views@lbc.co.uk