Ditching green policies may not be the vote winner Sunak expects | Green politics

Rishi Sunak has made a calculation this week, after hanging on to Uxbridge in large part because of the Tories’ anti-low emissions zone campaign, to row back on other green policies in the hope that it will create a dividing line with Labour at the next election.

Yet his own version of David Cameron’s fateful decision to “cut the green crap”, which added £2.5bn to energy bills over the subsequent decade by ending onshore wind projects, solar subsidies and energy efficiency schemes, may not be the vote winner some Tories believe.

Action on the climate crisis has very high levels of public support in the UK, backed – until now – by political consensus. Tackling it is a priority for Tory and Labour supporters, while half of all voters believe the government is not doing enough to get to net zero, according to polling by More In Common.

The perception that “red wall” voters do not care about the issue is not backed up by the evidence. In fact, the opposite is true, with polls suggesting this group cares more deeply than others about the impact of rising temperatures on their families, jobs and country.

“Blue wall” voters also believe that getting to net zero should be a priority, and adopting green technology such as electric vehicles and heat pumps is increasingly becoming part of their identity.

“It would be a mistake for politicians to misinterpret the Uxbridge result and end up on the wrong side of public opinion,” said Luke Tryl, the director of More in Common. “Our polling and focus groups are clear. If the Conservative party were to deliberately tarnish its green credentials, it would risk further damaging the party’s prospects with the two voting blocs they most need to win back: voters in the blue and red wall.”

Signals this week that Sunak could delay or abandon green policies that impose a direct cost on consumers could have a knock-on effect, undermining trust that the government will not suddenly do a U-turn on measures after people have already paid out.

“Politicians dithering on climate risks being as dangerous to building consensus as outright opposition,” Tryl said. “Many voters still feel burned by the U-turn on diesel cars and are wary of being marched up the hill and forced to make expensive investments if politicians are just going to change their minds.

“The mixed signals coming out of Downing Street over the past few days will have done nothing to reassure the public that the government is serious about transition and that they should start to make the changes in their lives.”

There are other risks to the public consensus. The first is cost. While most Britons are alarmed by the climate crisis and would willingly take some personal steps and back government policies to help combat it, their commitment has limits if they are struggling.

Politicians have an obligation to explain why green measures are worth it in the long run, financially and environmentally, as well as considering subsidies and other mitigations for the worst off.

Some people worry that green measures will affect their quality of life. In one More In Common focus group, a woman said she wanted action because she cared about her grandchildren’s future but she was annoyed she had to drink a McDonald’s milkshake through a paper straw.

Some 58% of people polled by More In Common said the climate movement had their support, compared with 34% who said it did not. But 72% said its protests went too far, suggesting Just Stop Oil’s tactics were starting to have an adverse impact. Sunak has already shown how he plans to capitalise on that disquiet.