Millie Gould
It seems the Labour government’s commitments to climate action are up in the air after Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced her support for Heathrow Airport’s long-debated third runway expansion. This endorsement came amidst her speech at a Siemens Healthineers facility in Oxford, where Reeves highlighted her support for ‘growth at all costs’. In 2023, Reeves pledged to be Britain’s first green Chancellor. However, January’s announcement, along with recent remarks at the World Economic Forum, hailing economic growth as the "number one mission" of the government, demonstrate a significant shift from that vision. This seemingly ill-informed pursuit for growth above all else raises fundamental questions: growth for whom, and at what cost? These sentiments are reflected by Labour MP, Clive Lewis who recently expressed his support for the Climate and Nature Bill, stating: “You cannot have growth on a dead planet.”
In a bid to "kickstart growth", the government claims that the proposed third runway has
the potential to create over 100,000 direct jobs and boost the British economy. The government maintains that the expansion project will align with the UK’s existing environmental and climate commitments. Yet, given the nation is already struggling to reach its net-zero targets, how convincing is this claim? With emissions from the UK’s transport sector soaring by almost 40% since 2021, the nation should be leading in decarbonising the transport system rather than pursuing something that “blows our carbon budget out of the sky”. Whilst Reeves suggests that by going “further and faster” the government can deliver benefits to both businesses and working people across Britain, it seems that we will instead be descending further and faster into full-blown climate breakdown. In fact, only 5 years ago, plans for a third Heathrow runway were ruled as illegal by the Court of Appeal, due to the plan’s failure to address the issue of climate change. The current government has done little to convince sceptics and environmentalists that the predicted environmental impact of a third runway can be compatible with the government’s net-zero goals. Not only this, but the expansion plans directly contradict the guidance from the government’s official advisory board, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC). Their 2023 carbon budget report stated: “No airport expansions should proceed until a UK-wide capacity management framework is in place to annually assess and, if required, control sector… emissions”. Estimates suggest that a third runway will produce an additional six million tons of carbon emissions each year, a vastly irresponsible pursuit amid a global climate emergency.
Whilst the government maintains that developing green technology will play a substantial role in ensuring expansion plans remain within the carbon budget, the CCC warns that reliance on unproven technology is high risk. Even the Chancellor herself recognises the low-carbon economy as a unique industrial opportunity, stating that “we should grasp this rather than chasing high-carbon, high-risk projects.” Yet it is evident that the Labour government is currently struggling to act upon these sentiments.
Whilst growth is unquestionably important, research from The New Economics Foundation suggests that airport expansion will not offer serious economic growth, instead boosting overseas spending that will not benefit the UK economy. Instead, environmentalists argue we should be focusing on the emerging green economy, which grew by 9% last year, offering a far more reliable pathway for economic growth. Furthermore, by merely viewing net-zero goals as an economic opportunity, we risk losing sight of just what is at stake: the survival of our species.
This is not the first time this Labour leadership has demonstrated an inconsistent approach to its climate pledges and policies. In 2021, £28 billion of capital green investment was promised, a pledge that did not even survive until the general election before it was scrapped. The Heathrow expansion project itself has exposed turbulence and inconsistencies within the party’s leadership. The now Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Ed Miliband, even threatened his resignation in 2009 over the Heathrow expansion debate, yet allegedly will not seek to disrupt the government’s newly unveiled plans. In fact, PM Keir Starmer voted against a third runway in 2018, even celebrating the legal blockages preventing its expansion on X, formerly Twitter. Labour’s London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, on the other hand insists his views have not changed, stating that he “wouldn’t hesitate to launch with partners and colleagues another legal challenge” against Heathrow expansion plans.
This issue, however, spans beyond Heathrow expansion proposals and highlights a much wider issue, the persistent prioritisation of economic interests over environmental interests. Reeves’ endorsement of a third Heathrow runway echoes previous government policy missteps, such as the HS2 debacle and the continuous erosion of green belt land, projects widely criticised as costly, environmentally harmful, and ultimately ineffective. At present, the Labour government risks appearing even less committed to its net-zero goals than its Conservative predecessors, demonstrating a considerable inability to balance its economic and environmental aspirations.
We stand at a pivotal moment in UK climate policy. Will the government step up in the face of the decarbonisation challenge, or are we already on the runway to ruin? It is evident that the proposals face substantial legal and political hurdles before plans for a third runway can even begin to take off. Yet, Reeves has promised to reduce regulation through a planning and infrastructure bill, aiming to hence make it more difficult to oppose such new developments. Such reckless policy promises seem to indicate that economic growth trumps all else for the Labour government, sending the UK’s net-zero targets into a tailspin.
Comentarios