The climate driven storm of the century should ground Reeves’ push for airport expansion
Today we are waiting for the Chancellor’s speech on growth, with likely announcements about airport expansions, including at Gatwick Airport. David Allwright, our colleague at The Wildlife Trusts, sets out why the Government’s false narrative of the economy vs the environment is so damaging for our long term economic and environmental prosperity.
By David Allwright
Public Affairs Officer for The Wildlife Trusts
As a wave of recent rhetoric from UK Government sends shockwaves across a nature-loving nation, it would seem that the new Labour administration is trying out a populist, anti-scientific stance on nature and climate for size.
Comments by the Chancellor, desperate for economic good news, suggest a troubling shift towards short-term thinking over the long-term stability of the UK's economy and environmental commitments. Likewise, the Prime Minister seems set to abandon his previous support for net zero carbon emissions and has attacked the ‘whims of Nimbys’.
Net Zero is not the blocker to growth
It's ironic that the Chancellor has voiced support for airport expansions that would significantly increase carbon emissions, whilst severe storms batter Northern Ireland and Scotland, and wildfires continue to devastate Los Angeles. Science is clear that climate change drives more extreme weather events, yet the UK Government appears willing to add fuel to the fire, even as the effects at home become increasingly evident.
The expansion of airports is questionable from both economic and environmental perspectives.
The Climate Change Committee has emphasised the need for a well-managed, coherent framework for aviation expansion, but these proposals fall short and are unlikely to yield substantial economic benefits. Some studies even show airport expansion could actively harm growth. Instead, they risk exacerbating existing regional inequalities between north and south whilst undermining the UK's legally binding climate change targets.
Restoring our natural environment is key to achieving net zero and not just valuable for the wildlife we work to protect. Restoring natural habitats - such as seagrass meadows - draws down carbon and reduces economic damage from severe weather events, such as floods and storms, which are becoming more frequent and intense due to climate change.
It would be truly mad to expand airports and to argue net zero is a blocker to growth when the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Government’s own economic adviser, published fiscal costs from climate change to the UK in September 2024 and came up with an increase in debt of 23% of GDP in 50 years for a ‘below 2°C’ scenario and 33% for a ‘below 3°C’ scenario. That is a catastrophic amount of economic damage for the UK economy, caused by climate chaos.
Nature is not the blocker to growth
Nature protections are not obstacles to success; they are the foundation of our economy and safety. The UK has legally binding targets to restore 30% of land and sea to nature by 2030. Abandoning these protections would be disastrous, especially as we face severe floods and storms, and 2024 being the warmest year on record, reaching 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels for the first time. Nature underpins economic growth, providing essential services such as food, drinking water and clean air.
The Dasgupta Review highlighted the economic value of nature, showing that our economy is built on a foundation of natural capital. Degrading this undermines economic stability and growth. By embedding nature recovery into all our economic plans, we can tackle the challenges of economic shocks from climate chaos, development and housing together. Strong leadership and properly enforced regulations are key to providing simplicity, certainty and driving business innovation in an integrated way.
Likewise The Green Finance Institute's report highlights the significant economic risks posed by nature degradation, which could reduce the UK's GDP by 12%, surpassing even the devastating impacts of the global financial crisis or the Covid-19 pandemic. It identifies various nature-related risks, including soil health decline, water shortages, global food security issues, zoonotic diseases and antimicrobial resistance. Notably, half of these risks originate overseas, underscoring the global interconnectedness of nature-related financial risks. The report calls for these risks to be acknowledged and addressed to enhance the UK's economic and financial resilience.
In short, harming nature means harming the economy.
Challenging bad development is not the blocker to growth
The UK Government's attack on the right to challenge bad planning through judicial reviews is deeply concerning. Judicial reviews are essential for holding our decision-makers accountable and a last resort, used sparingly, to ensure developments do not breach legal requirements (necessary legal requirements, which have been put in place to safeguard our environment). Making the judicial review process more efficient without restricting access to justice is crucial. This includes ensuring robust strategic planning to avoid wasting time on trying to develop on protected sites and addressing climate and nature protection through strong policy measures. Clear leadership from the UK Government would avoid the need for most legal challenges.
Increased resourcing and capacity building for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) are also essential measures to improve decision-making quality. Additionally, codifying the ‘duty of candour’ for timely document provision, extending limitation periods for planning judicial reviews and encouraging defendants to concede permission in appropriate cases will help reduce delays. Publishing performance indicators and introducing target timescales in courts will further enhance transparency and efficiency.
The bottom line is that it isn’t the ability to challenge bad development that is the problem. The majority of nationally significant infrastructure projects are not legally challenged and the majority of those that are challenged are considered to have grounds for being challenged.
Judicial reviews play a critical role in upholding environmental laws and standards. They provide a mechanism for civil society to challenge potentially unlawful decisions affecting the environment and achieve a remedy in the courts. This is particularly important in the context of the climate and nature crises, where the stakes are high and the consequences of poor decision-making are severe.
To create a sustainable and resilient economy, the Government should put climate action and nature recovery at the heart of the planning system, conduct thorough environmental assessments, enhance public participation, set clear interim targets, ensure transparency in decision-making and strengthen regulatory frameworks. These measures will streamline the planning process, ensure accountability and align developments with environmental objectives, creating win-wins for people and the planet.
So, to be clear, the UK Government should not expand planet-harming airports, abandon our limited nature protections or stop appropriate legal challenges for genuinely damaging development.
We know – and there is plenty of evidence to show – that restoring nature and taking bold climate action are the only ways to secure the real foundations of the economy.
Comments
Rachel Reeves’s proposals are madness and I plan to write to my MP. Thank you for the links you’ve provided which will help add weight to my letter.
29 Jan 2025 13:41:00
Sussex Wildlife Trust:
Thank you
Award winning economist Professor Simon Kuznets warned the world in 1937 that continual GDP growth wax unsustainable, unfair, and ecologically unsafe. We must move forward and develop a thriving circular economy, one which promotes recycling, repairing, reuse, sustainability, and creates secure, well paid, skilled jobs which people enjoy doing.
30 Jan 2025 03:41:00
This is an excellent, clear and well thought out argument in favour of protecting our fragile and beautiful ecosystem. Thank you for putting the case against airport expansion so well. I hope that somebody in government will take notice and begin the process of rethinking the future of our transport network in a sustainable way.
30 Jan 2025 11:44:00
So many bad decisions have just been made, and I’m not at all sure they will grow the economy. What about regional development. People need jobs where they live. Environmental workers get paid and contribute to the tax take just the same as other jobs!
30 Jan 2025 12:01:00
The populist turn by the Labour party to set up a Straw-Man and attack the environment and people who value the countryside and biodiversity is shocking and shows them to be total hypocrites’. They are now promoting lies and people need to show their anger with the current Government’s populist and nasty rhetoric by making a Complaint to the labour party . You can do so via the labour party website https://labour.org.uk/resources/making-a-complaint/ where the text says “Is your complaint about a decision, policy or the official conduct of the Prime Minister, the conduct, decision or policy of a Government Minister acting in their official role, or a policy or decision of the Labour Government?” Let them know we can see their hypocrisy, base populism and the anti-environment lies and policies they are promoting.
30 Jan 2025 12:13:00
Fantastic writing. I hope you can send this to No 10 Downing Street. It’s a disgrace what Labour are doing, they haven’t got a clue!!
30 Jan 2025 12:27:00
In this morning’s Today interview (BBC R4) 30th Jan the Chancellor attempted to justify support for airport expansion relying in considerable part on expectations of reduced aviation emissions; technology that has not yet been proven on a large scale.
No reference was made to the enormous embodied energy in construction, including relevant infrastructure, aircraft construction and servicing. No reference was made to impacts arising from increased passenger numbers, including road travel etc.
The Chancellor’s responses seemed to underscore haste, denial of evidence and naivety.
Planning system needs investment, not crippling or dismantling.
30 Jan 2025 12:39:00
How much more tax payers money will be spent on lawyers, consultants etc before all is abandoned again, same as HS2 and other reckless ideas.
30 Jan 2025 14:59:00
I couldn’t agree more with these comments.
It seems this government is hell bent on riding rough shod over local people’s concerns regarding planning etc. not to mention nationally.
Putting solar panels across swathes of agricultural land and developing green field sites is not the answer. And whatever do they mean by “grey filed”? This is very concerning.
In Lewes there are brown field sites which don’t appear to have been considered for affordable housing. What has been passed by SDNP with regard to the bus station is tant amount to sabotage. A six storey development at the bottom of our historic High Street is certainly not in keeping and with so many shops standing empty, do we really need more? The bus station was an iconic building and served its purpose really well.
With local people’s fears and objections being over ridden I really fear for the future of our local green spaces let alone the impact on wildlife.Next thing we’ll hear is thet the Eton Town development will be given the okay!!
30 Jan 2025 15:03:00
I spent a good half hour composing a letter to my Hastings and Rye Labour MP trying to persuade her to vote in favour of the cross party Climate and Nature Bill….never heard a word back…. Vote Labour get Tory ‘get rid of the green cr.p’…vote the Greens maybe, finally, get Green.
30 Jan 2025 15:15:00
When Reeves tells deveopers planning wont be restrained by bats and newts it demonstrates not only her total contempt for the enviroment but how badly she is out of touch with modern thinking and respect for nature. Her budget was rubbish and her drive for growth will not work. Any doudts about this then check the opinions of CEO of Ryan Air regarding our illustrious chancellor.
30 Jan 2025 15:25:00
I don’t think SWT should be posting such political posts. Whilst I am sympathetic to the content this isn’t the forum. I don’t want to hear about this in a nature forum, please stop or you will lose my membership.
30 Jan 2025 15:36:00
Sussex Wildlife Trust:
Thank you for your support for the Trust. As someone who cares about wildlife, we hope you will appreciate that the Trust will always stand up for nature.
We are in a climate and nature emergency, and the UK is already classified as one of the world’s most nature-depleted countries. With five years until the legally-binding 2030 deadline to secure nature's recovery, the UK government, regardless of political party, is responsible for turning this around. We need to see the right policy, legislation and – crucially – action for nature on the ground, so we have always worked hard as a local Trust and as part of the national Wildlife Trust movement, in coalition with the wider conservation sector, to influence decision-makers, including the government, to drive positive change and secure nature’s recovery. Speaking up for wildlife in this way is a critical element of our work, now more than ever.
Award winning economist Professor Simon Kuznets warned the world in 1937 that continual GDP growth wax unsustainable, unfair, and ecologically unsafe. We must move forward and develop a thriving circular economy, one which promotes recycling, repairing, reuse, sustainability, and creates secure, well paid, skilled jobs which people enjoy doing.
30 Jan 2025 15:39:00
Labour can never be trusted with the environment, I don’t know how Ed Milliband sleeps at night… of course what is written here is true, but who, of those in power, takes the time to really absorb it?
30 Jan 2025 16:31:00
Airport expansion has been going on for years together with HS2. I have no strong opinion either way. I do know there is a need for more airport capacity. Manston airport in Kent could be utilised as it will take all size planes and was intended latterly to take planes that could not land elsewhere. Ideal for commercial use and not passengers.
30 Jan 2025 16:33:00
Green means a safer planet for the future, short termism means dangerous habitats not just for wildlife but for the whole human race
30 Jan 2025 17:01:00
I expect Sussex Wildlife Trust to be an organisation without political affiliations. This lengthy diatribe crosses a line.
30 Jan 2025 17:06:00
Sussex Wildlife Trust:
We are in a climate and nature emergency, and the UK is already classified as one of the world’s most nature-depleted countries. With five years until the legally-binding 2030 deadline to secure nature's recovery, the UK government, regardless of political party, is responsible for turning this around. We need to see the right policy, legislation and – crucially – action for nature on the ground, so we have always worked hard as a local Trust and as part of the national Wildlife Trust movement, in coalition with the wider conservation sector, to influence decision-makers, including the government, to drive positive change and secure nature’s recovery. Speaking up for wildlife in this way is a critical element of our work, now more than ever.
There was hope with a new government , now there seems little . Shame on them
30 Jan 2025 17:08:00
I am appalled at this Government’s negative attitude towards nature and the environment. This was demonstrated by the recent failure of the Climate and Nature Bill to receive a second reading, by their intentions to expand UK airports and their complete disregard of environmental concerns in the planning system. When it comes to understanding the effects of climate change on the economy, Labour are behaving like ostriches!
30 Jan 2025 18:40:00
It’s so concerning that we have a government that puts the environment and the amazing animals that inhabit it at the bottom of its list of priorities! I am really disappointed by its ignorance and lack of forethought. It’s so sad because the damage they are likely to cause is catastrophic.
30 Jan 2025 19:24:00
I can only agree with the sentiments expressed in David Allwright’s piece. There is a naive optimism among those who think that business-as-usual will work, thanks to carbon-capture-and-storage and sustainable aviation fuel. The former is technology that is unproven at the scale required. The latter, whilst proven technology, is unlikely ever to satisfy more than a small fraction of the demand. Meanwhile, as the planet heats up, permafrost thaws and its trapped organic matter decays to add even more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. At some point this positive feedback loop will be unstoppable and it will be game over, not just for the environment as we know it but ultimately for human populations. Among the people who will suffer most will be the world’s poorest people, who have never set foot in an aircraft.
I am baffled by those who object to SWT taking a view. Is an organisation whose raison d’etre is to defend the natural ecosystems, when faced with antithetical government policy, expected to stand back and pretend nothing untoward is happening? That would truly be a dereliction of duty.
30 Jan 2025 21:27:00
It is hard to understand how the Government can come to the conclusion we need more airport runways leading to more and more pollution. Given all the developments in modern communication we do not need to fly here, there and everywhere. Yes, “it would be nice” to visit far flung places and visit family and friends living around the world. But, to keep this way of living, which also increases as the population grows, inevitably creates even more destructive carbon emissions. This whole behaviour is selfish and short-sighted. Perhaps there should be a draconian rule – in the short term only, once a year a person is allowed to fly but this is only short term, followed by a total ban on all flying!
31 Jan 2025 08:50:00
Thank you so much that’s an absolutely brilliant piece and we will use it when we meet up with our MP in Eastbourne
31 Jan 2025 09:06:00
Thank you for this well written piece.
Sadly, on the back of a wafer thin vote, the Labour Government are determined to pursue economic growth at the expense of nature and the environment.
Sadly our trajectory as a nation and a soecies seems to be of the destruction of our world, and ourselves in the process.
31 Jan 2025 11:19:00
instead of blaming bat tunnels & other environmental measure to try & preserve what wildlife we have left the Chancellor should perhaps have cast an eye on badly written contracts, overblown consultants fees & unrealistic costings, to start with; then maybe of the greed of those inflating costs & milking the gravy train, if that’s not too much of a mixed metaphor for us all…
31 Jan 2025 17:18:00
Thanks for posting this. I think it’s brilliant that Sussex Wildlife Trust is able to take such a strong, clear position.
At a time when taking action on climate and nature is so obviously urgent, and vital for us all, I don’t think that it’s possible to be “non-political” if you care about nature (or other people).
My membership of SWT lapsed a couple of years ago, but informed, relevant writing like this will encourage me to rejoin.
31 Jan 2025 17:35:00
Where on earth does our current Labour led government think their plans are going. It seems to be their motto is destroy all that is sensible. So many wonderful quotes on this site.
01 Feb 2025 10:44:00