Pages

Friday, June 19, 2026

Ian Bradford: What is the UK Energy Secretary Thinking? Will UK Citizens Accept these Legally Binding Climate Polices?


UK Energy Secretary Ed Milliband has signed up to a legally binding goal to cut the UK’s carbon (meaning carbon dioxide), emissions by 87% by 2040. To meet this goal, households will need to replace boilers with heat pumps, shift to electric cars and eat 25% less meat and a fifth less dairy.

The climate target, recommended by the Government advisors the Climate Change Committee (CCC), is one of the world’s most ambitious – probably the most ambitious.

Bear in mind that Britain is responsible for less than 1% of global greenhouse emissions.

This agreement comes in spite of a major backlash to net zero policies by the Conservatives and the Reform party both of which have promised to abolish these targets if they win power.

The CCC said more people can expect to drive electric cars and use heat pumps which they say would result in lower energy bills.

While it said people would need to reduce meat and dairy, it said that they would still be able to fly at close to today’s levels - how ironic is that?

More trees would have to be planted to reduce carbon emissions, while petrol lawnmowers would have to be replaced by battery powered models.

The pledge to reduce greenhouse gases by 87% on 1990 levels is seen as vital to reaching net zero by 2050 - a target the Conservatives and the Reform parties have pledged to scrap.

But a Labour source has stated: “This is a fight we’re happy to have, and the politics is strong for Labour, especially with others really rowing back. Businesses want certainty, public polling remains strong on climate action, and long-term benefits outweigh any costs. Fundamentally, this is about energy security, investment, and Britain’s future competitiveness.”

Meanwhile, energy prices spiral, impacted by wars in Ukraine and Iran due to Britain’s reliance on fossil fuel markets. It also comes as pressure grows for him (Milliband), to grant permission to approve on the Jackdaw and Rosebank North Sea oil and gas fields. But Mr. Milliband said the drive for clean homegrown power was the only way to protect family and business finances. He accused opponents of sticking their heads in the sand about climate breakdown and its impact on future generations.

Legislation is due to be laid soon, and a parliamentary vote is due to be held before the end of June.

What does the Reform Party Say?

Deputy leader Richard Tice considers climate change to be a generational trend and it is undeniable.

He says:

1. Energy security is vital to the sovereignty of any nation.

2. Fossil fuel should be replaced by a viable alternative which is nuclear.

3. The subsidies to renewables are not economically, (or environmentally), justifiable.

4. The country should prepare to adapt to climate change which is inevitable.

Reform has staked out a hardline position against renewable energy. It wants to ban battery storage, scrap net zero targets, support fracking and offshore drilling, and end taxpayer funded green subsidies. Instead of renewables, Tice wants to attract investment in nuclear power. The UK is currently building two nuclear power plants.

Tice rejected the scientific ‘consensus’ that climate change accelerated because of man-made emissions. But he said if the weather is becoming more dangerous people should just adapt to it. The country should have a “debate” about whether to prioritise desalination or build more reservoirs to deal with drought he said, blaming water companies for failing to prepare for more dry spells.

What Does Former PM Tony Blair say about Net Zero?

Sir Tony Bair has called for a major rethink of net zero policies, arguing that limiting energy consumption and fossil fuel production is “doomed to fail”.

He says that voters are being asked to make financial sacrifices and changes in lifestyle when they know the impact on global emissions is minimal. The Conservatives who have joined the Reform party in opposing net zero emissions by 2050, urged Labour to end the “mad dash” to this goal – but Downing St said it would not be changing course.

The public have lost faith in climate policies because the promised green jobs and economic growth have failed to materialise.

Sir Tony says any strategy based on either phasing out fossil fuels in the short term or limiting consumption is a strategy doomed to fail. He also warns against the “alarmist” tone of the debate on climate change, which he says is riven with irrationality.

The report from the Tony Blair Institute calls for greater use of AI to make energy grids efficient, and investment in small scale nuclear reactors. He also argues for more focus on climate change adaptation measures such as flood defences.

Downing St continues to say they will not be changing course on net zero. “We will reach net zero in a way that treads lightly on people’s lives, not telling them how to live or behave”, said the PM’s official spokesperson – after telling people to cut meat and dairy, drive electric vehicles, and get rid of their petrol lawnmowers!

Writing on social media Reform UK leader Nigel Farrage said: “Even Tony Blair now says the push for net zero has become ‘irrational and hysterical’.”

Conservative acting shadow energy secretary Andrew Bowie said the government needed to “urgently change course.” It seems even Tony Bair has come to the realisation that Keir Starmer and the Labour Party’s mad dash to net zero by 2050 is simply not feasible or sustainable,” he added.

Ian Bradford, a science graduate, is a former teacher, lawyer, farmer and keen sportsman, who is writing a book about the fraud of anthropogenic climate change.

6 comments:

anonymous said...

A Green tyrant - now seeking to be
Chancellor so imagine what he would do there !

Chuck Bird said...

Sadly, the Herald is still publishing alarmist nonsense. It was published on 17 June. It is paywalled, so I have not included a link. This alarmist cannot present a logical argument, so she makes an ageist attack on Winston.
"Ask 20-year-olds, not Winston Peters, if we can afford to exit the Paris climate agreement - Dr Jen Purdie"
I emailed her and asked if she would debate her claims. As expected, I got no reply. If someone wrote an article attacking someone's race or sex
the Herald would not print it. Does anyone know where I could make a complaint about this ageist attack?

K said...

UK, part of the (NOT) elite energy failure club...
https://nominister.wordpress.com/2026/06/19/net-zero-failure-germany/

Anonymous said...

Dr Jen Purdie’s article was wrong in tone, turning a policy problem into a morality play; my way or the catastrophe highway.

Claims of an existential threat to humanity are not supported by the full evidence, and the worst-case RCP8.5 scenario underpinning these claims since 2010 has now been debunked by the IPCC as “implausible”

Global temperatures are increasing, but human societies are also becoming more resilient. Notably, deaths from weather-related disasters, a central tenet of the article, have fallen dramatically over the past century thanks to better forecasting, infrastructure and emergency response.

New Zealand needs practical emissions reduction, better flood management, stronger infrastructure and honest cost-benefit analysis — not apocalyptic rhetoric that risks generating more heat than light.

Anonymous said...

And the carbon costs of producing all this replacement stuff, mostly made in belching Chinese factories, then shipped to the UK in sulphur oil burning ships is how much ?

But Jacinda would approve of this pointless virtuous nonsense.

Anonymous said...

No economy without a liveable climate. As we are starting to see with crop farmers in New Zealand. Good to see the UK taking firm steps towards a sustainable planet and a sustainable future.

Post a Comment

Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.