CHRIS Packham has been granted permission for a judicial review of the UK Government’s decision to reverse some of its green policies.
The naturalist and TV presenter sent a challenge to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in October after the Government watered down policies aimed at helping to cut UK climate-warming emissions to zero overall by 2050, known as net zero.
Sunak announced the rollback in September, which included delaying the ban on the sale of new diesel and petrol cars from 2030 to 2035, reducing the phase-out of gas boilers from 100% to 80% by 2035, and scrapping the requirement for energy efficiency upgrades for homes.
The Prime Minister said the UK’s approach to net zero was imposing “unacceptable costs on hard-pressed British families”.
READ MORE: Forestry and Land Scotland hits 10,000 hectares of peatland restoration
In an announcement today, law firm Leigh Day, which is representing Packham, said Mr Justice Eyre had granted permission for the legal challenge to be heard in court.
The legal team said a judge will decide whether it was lawful for ministers to decide to water down the policies, with a hearing to take place later this year.
The measures and timetable to introduce the policies were laid out in a Carbon Budget Delivery Plan (CBDP) put before Parliament in March 2023.
This came after a successful legal challenge by Friends of the Earth which argued that the Government’s Net Zero Strategy did not include necessary details on how the UK would reach its legally binding targets by 2050.
The Leigh Day team will argue that after the decision, Sunak did not confirm whether the Government would still be able to meet its sixth carbon budget and how it would do so, as required by the 2008 Climate Change Act.
Leigh Day said Packham has been given the go-ahead to argue three grounds in court.
He will say it is not lawful for the Government to remove key policies from the CBDP without having others in place to ensure targets will still be met.
The case also alleges that when taking the decision to water down the policies, the Government failed to take mandatory and relevant considerations into account, including the impact on the achievement of the carbon budgets and the net zero target as well as advice from the Climate Change Committee.
On the third ground, Packham will argue there was a failure to consult the public and key stakeholders before abandoning the policies.
READ MORE: Chris Packham calls for action to save Scotland's great skuas
The naturalist said: “The pledges which the Government abandoned were important parts of the UK’s plan to reach net zero in order to ameliorate the effects of climate breakdown and biodiversity loss which threaten life on our planet.
“Notably they, unlike some of the other parts of that strategy, were actually quantifiable, they were directly measurable in terms of carbon management.
“To abandon them without having comparable quantifiable measures in place was reckless and dangerous.
“To abandon them without seeking qualified advice was undemocratic and arrogant.”
Carol Day, a Leigh Day solicitor representing the TV star, said: “Mr Packham will argue that it cannot be lawful for the Government to abandon carefully thought-out policies designed to achieve net zero targets without having other measures in place.
“It would make the Government’s report to Parliament under the Climate Change Act nothing more than a snapshot in time.”
A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: “We strongly reject these claims and will be robustly defending this challenge.
“We are the first major economy to halve emissions and have one of the most ambitious legally binding emissions targets in the world, having overdelivered on every carbon budget to date.
“We are committed to meeting our legal net zero commitments and families will now have more time to make the transition, saving some people thousands of pounds at a time when cost of living is high.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel