Connect with us

Published

on

Rishi Sunak looks set to weaken key climate pledges in a move that has drawn heavy criticism from Tory MPs and environmental groups.

The prime minister said he remains committed to the net zero target by 2050 but will achieve it “in a better, more proportionate way”.

It comes after a BBC report said as part of a major policy shift, the PM could weaken the plan to phase out gas boilers from 2035 and delay the ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars – currently due in 2030 – by five years.

It sparked anger among Tory MPs, with one telling Sky News they are “seriously considering” a no confidence letter.

Politics latest: What is 2030 petrol car ban – and could it be postponed?

However, in a statement on Tuesday night, Mr Sunak said: “No leak will stop me beginning the process of telling the country how and why we need to change.

“As a first step, I’ll be giving a speech this week to set out an important long-term decision we need to make so our country becomes the place I know we all want it to be for our children.”

More on Net Zero

Giving a flavour of what is to come, the prime minister added: “I know people are frustrated with politics and want real change.

“Our political system rewards short-term decision-making that is holding our country back.

“For too many years politicians in governments of all stripes have not been honest about costs and trade offs. Instead they have taken the easy way out, saying we can have it all.”

He nsisted that realism “doesn’t mean losing our ambition or abandoning our commitments – far from it”.

He said: “I am proud that Britain is leading the world on climate change. We are committed to net zero by 2050 and the agreements we have made internationally – but doing so in a better, more proportionate way.

“Our politics must again put the long-term interests of our country before the short-term political needs of the moment.”

Analysis: Targets designed to drive net zero set to be softened

Mr Sunak has previously hinted he is prepared to water down climate policies that add extra costs and “hassle” to households.

It came after the Tories’ unexpected victory at the Uxbridge by-election, which was credited to their opposition to the ULEZ congestion zone charge scheme.

Since then some Tory MPs have argued the party should drop green policies that could impose costs on consumers to gain votes at the ballot box.

But others are concerned it will damage the UK’s reputation on climate change.

Tory MPs are particularly angry about the reported change to the car policy, with one calling it “anti-business” – given how much the car industry has invested in Electric Vehicles (EV).

They told Sky’s deputy political editor Sam Coates that a push back on the petrol and diesel ban would mean breaking a promise the prime minister made to Conservative MPs privately.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How much will net zero cost?

Separately, one minister said they would be “staggered” if the car ban is delayed because of the signals it sends to industry, telling Sky News: “Every automotive company is investing in EV, we’ve just given Tata all this money to make batteries, it’s bonkers.”

Some senior Tory figures voiced their concern publicly, with former Cop26 president Sir Alok Sharma warning that “for any party to resile from this (climate action) agenda will not help economically or electorally”.

Tory former Cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke tweeted that “it is in our environmental, economic, moral and (yes) political interests as @Conservatives to make sure we lead on this issue rather than disown it”.

There was also anger from opposition MPs and climate groups.

Labour’s shadow energy secretary Ed Miliband said: “This is a complete farce from a Tory government that literally does not know what they are doing day to day.

“Thirteen years of failed energy policy has led to an energy bills crisis, weakened our energy security, lost jobs, and failed on the climate crisis.”

Friends of the Earth’s head of policy, Mike Childs, said: “Rolling back on key climate commitments as the world is being battered by extreme flooding and wildfires would be morally indefensible.

“It is legally questionable too as the UK has binding greenhouse gas reduction targets that it’s already in danger of missing.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves acknowledges damage of ‘too many’ budget leaks

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves acknowledges damage of 'too many' budget leaks

The Chancellor Rachel Reeves has acknowledged there were “too many leaks” in the run-up to last month’s budget.

The flow of budget content to news organisations was “very damaging”, Ms Reeves told MPs on the Treasury select committee on Wednesday.

“Leaks are unacceptable. The budget had too much speculation. There were too many leaks, and much of those leaks and speculation were inaccurate, very damaging”, she said.

Money blog: Nine-year-old set up Christmas tree business to pay for university

The cost of UK government borrowing briefly spiked after news reports that income taxes would not rise as first expected and Labour would not break its manifesto pledge.

An inquiry into the leaks from the Treasury to members of the media is to take place. But James Bowler, the Treasury’s top official, who was also giving evidence to MPs, would not say the results of it would be published.

Committee chair Dame Meg Hillier asked if the group of MPs could see the full inquiry.

More on Budget 2025

“I’d have to engage with the people in the inquiry about the views on that”, replied Mr Bowler, permanent secretary to the Treasury.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

OBR leak ‘a mistake of such gravity’

The entire contents of the budget ended up being released 40 minutes early via independent forecasters, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

A report into this error found the OBR had uploaded documents containing their calculations of budget numbers to a link on the watchdog’s website it had mistakenly believed was inaccessible to the public.

Tax rises ruled out

The chancellor ruled out future revenue-raising measures, including applying capital gains tax to primary residences and changing the state pension triple.

Committee member and former chair Dame Harriet Baldwin had noted that the chancellor’s previous statement to the MPs when she said she would not overhaul council tax and look at road pricing, turned out to be inaccurate.

During the budget, an electric vehicle charge per mile was introduced, as was an additional council tax for those with properties worth £2m or more.

Continue Reading

Politics

Strategy responds to MSCI letter, makes case for index inclusion

Published

on

By

Strategy responds to MSCI letter, makes case for index inclusion

Strategy, the largest Bitcoin treasury company, submitted feedback to index company MSCI on Wednesday about the proposed policy change that would exclude digital asset treasury companies holding 50% or more in crypto on their balance sheets from stock market index inclusion.

Digital asset treasury companies are operating companies that can actively adjust their businesses, according to the letter, which cited Strategy’s Bitcoin-backed credit instruments as an example.

The proposed policy change would bias the MSCI against crypto as an asset class, instead of the index company acting as a neutral arbiter, the letter said.

Bitcoin Regulation, Stocks, MicroStrategy
The first page of Strategy’s letter to the MSCI pushes back against the proposed eligibility criteria change. Source: Strategy

The MSCI does not exclude other types of businesses that invest in a single asset class, including real estate investment trusts (REITs), oil companies and media portfolios, according to Strategy. The letter said:

“Many financial institutions primarily hold certain types of assets and then package and sell derivatives backed by those assets, like residential mortgage-backed securities.”

The letter also said implementing the change “undermines” US President Donald Trump’s goal of making the United States the global leader in crypto. However, critics argue that including crypto treasury companies in global indexes poses several risks.