Rishi Sunak has now publicly stated that Britain should abandon its legal commitment to achieving Net Zero, a stance that, ironically, he could have taken while in office. His realization has come late, but at least he has finally recognized what was obvious all along—Britain simply cannot afford it.  

 

Net Zero was never a wise idea to begin with. Now, however, it has become an outright dangerous one. Even before the government’s desperate search for additional funds to bolster defense spending, the financial burden of Net Zero was staggering.

 

The true cost has never been clear, and even today, no one can accurately predict the final bill. Back in 2019, then-Chancellor Philip Hammond estimated that reaching Net Zero by 2050 would cost Britain over a trillion pounds—a figure dismissed at the time but never seriously disproven. With the economy stagnating and energy prices continuing to climb, this legally binding commitment, hastily passed by Theresa May in the waning moments of her leadership, has the potential to inflict severe economic harm.  

 

And for what gain? Even if Britain were to miraculously achieve Net Zero overnight, the effect on global temperatures would be negligible. The UK is responsible for less than 1% of the world’s annual greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, major polluters such as China, the US, India, and Russia continue to produce emissions at a scale that dwarfs anything Britain could cut.

 

Unless these nations also commit to drastic reductions, Britain's economic self-sacrifice will achieve little beyond national impoverishment. Climate change will continue its course, but the British people will be left struggling to afford even the simplest pleasures of life.  

 

The new Labour government, despite inheriting what they have called a “£22 billion black hole” from the Conservatives, appears determined to dig even deeper. Their £18 billion payout to Mauritius over the Chagos Islands and Ed Miliband’s radical green policies threaten to dismantle industries, scar the countryside, and leave homes freezing. If this continues, the economic consequences will be devastating.  

 

However, there may be a glimmer of hope. Reports suggest Miliband could be removed in an upcoming reshuffle, with the government potentially reconsidering some of his more excessive policies. Even so, the financial burden of Net Zero may still cost Britain hundreds of billions. Sunak’s late realization is a step in the right direction, but unless the government acts decisively, the country may be trapped in a costly and futile pursuit that it simply cannot afford.

 

Based on a report by The Telegraph  2025-03-07

 

 

2 hours ago, Social Media said:

With the economy stagnating and energy prices continuing to climb, this legally binding commitment, hastily passed by Theresa May in the waning moments of her leadership, has the potential to inflict severe economic harm.  

 

Yes after ruining Brexit she tried to ruin the long term energy outlook of the UK.

 

The Tories made a lot of mistakes, but the far the biggest was allowing Labour into power. Ed Miliband's obsession with net zero is incredibly dangerous for all but the very wealthy.  

 

 

David Milliband's return from the shadows to front line politics will cost UK residents dearly if allowed to continue his misguided zero policies encouraged by Starmer. 

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes after ruining Brexit she tried to ruin the long term energy outlook of the UK.

 

The Tories made a lot of mistakes, but the far the biggest was allowing Labour into power. Ed Miliband's obsession with net zero is incredibly dangerous for all but the very wealthy.  

 

 

 

So May ruined Brexit? So, usual question(s), Jonny, which I expect you will avoid answering once again.

 

What does this utopian Brexit look like, and how should/ could it (have) be(en) achieved?

12 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So May ruined Brexit? So, usual question(s), Jonny, which I expect you will avoid answering once again.

 

What does this utopian Brexit look like, and how should/ could it (have) be(en) achieved?

How about control of our boarders for a start,Without the interference of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

Net zero is creating jobs and boosting the economy:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/24/britain-net-zero-economy-booming-cbi-green-sector-jobs-energy-security

Nett zero is a total fallacy. It will not work

7 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

Rishi Sunak has now publicly stated that Britain should abandon its legal commitment to achieving Net Zero, a stance that, ironically, he could have taken while in office. His realization has come late, but at least he has finally recognized what was obvious all along—Britain simply cannot afford it.  

 

 

Net Zero was never a wise idea to begin with. Now, however, it has become an outright dangerous one. Even before the government’s desperate search for additional funds to bolster defense spending, the financial burden of Net Zero was staggering.

 

The true cost has never been clear, and even today, no one can accurately predict the final bill. Back in 2019, then-Chancellor Philip Hammond estimated that reaching Net Zero by 2050 would cost Britain over a trillion pounds—a figure dismissed at the time but never seriously disproven. With the economy stagnating and energy prices continuing to climb, this legally binding commitment, hastily passed by Theresa May in the waning moments of her leadership, has the potential to inflict severe economic harm.  

 

And for what gain? Even if Britain were to miraculously achieve Net Zero overnight, the effect on global temperatures would be negligible. The UK is responsible for less than 1% of the world’s annual greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, major polluters such as China, the US, India, and Russia continue to produce emissions at a scale that dwarfs anything Britain could cut.

 

Unless these nations also commit to drastic reductions, Britain's economic self-sacrifice will achieve little beyond national impoverishment. Climate change will continue its course, but the British people will be left struggling to afford even the simplest pleasures of life.  

 

The new Labour government, despite inheriting what they have called a “£22 billion black hole” from the Conservatives, appears determined to dig even deeper. Their £18 billion payout to Mauritius over the Chagos Islands and Ed Miliband’s radical green policies threaten to dismantle industries, scar the countryside, and leave homes freezing. If this continues, the economic consequences will be devastating.  

 

However, there may be a glimmer of hope. Reports suggest Miliband could be removed in an upcoming reshuffle, with the government potentially reconsidering some of his more excessive policies. Even so, the financial burden of Net Zero may still cost Britain hundreds of billions. Sunak’s late realization is a step in the right direction, but unless the government acts decisively, the country may be trapped in a costly and futile pursuit that it simply cannot afford.

 

Based on a report by The Telegraph  2025-03-07

 

 

Why does it take these supposed highly intelligent politicians some time to see sense with these hare-brained ideas when the average person figures it out with just a few minutes research on’t t’internet🤨

Just now, HK MacPhooey said:

Why does it take these supposed highly intelligent politicians some time to see sense with these hare-brained ideas when the average person figures it out with just a few minutes research on’t t’internet🤨

Who is spreading lies in that Politicians are intelligent? If they were intelligent that wouldn't come out with the garbage they currently spread. Come on own up, who is it? Look at Miliband, he has the IQ of a dead snail. (My apologies to and dead snails reading this)

The UK and EU and all countries which have embraced Net Zero are now in the process of destroying their economies.  The after a few more countries like Romania over-turn election results as voters vote to toss their Net Zero Greenie leaders out of office, then the lid comes off the pressure cooker and it won't be pretty.

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes after ruining Brexit she tried to ruin the long term energy outlook of the UK.

 

The Tories made a lot of mistakes, but the far the biggest was allowing Labour into power. Ed Miliband's obsession with net zero is incredibly dangerous for all but the very wealthy.  

 

 

Sunak didn’t ‘ruin BREXIT’, it is the failure it was always going to be.

 

The Tories didn’t’ let Labour in’ the electorate made that decision.

 

Sunak had is chance, he lined the pockets of the rich while stripping money from the rest of society.

 

Renewables and net zero are creating jobs and boosting the economy, something Sunak failed to do.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Tiger1980 said:

How about control of our boarders for a start,Without the interference of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

 

If you are referring to dealing with illegal migrants then, arguably, things have become worse since we left the EU and opted out of the Dublin Agreement. Moreover, if membership of the EU was the sole reason preventing the UK from solving the problem of illegal immigration, why haven't successive UK governments been able to introduce measures which would do the trick?

 

If you are referring to legal immigration then the UK is more reliant than ever on overseas labour. Membership of the EU - in particular, freedom of movement - was beneficial in so many ways. Not only did UK employers have a vastly increased workforce to choose from, they were no bureaucratic hurdles to hiring EU nationals; part-time, fixed contract jobs were easy to fill with workers who were also transient, many of whom had no desire to immigrate permanently to the UK. These benefits were also available to Brits wanting to broaden their experience by living and working in the EU. Sadly, these benefits are no longer available to either Brits/EU workers or employers without firstly having to complete a lot of previously unnecessary red tape. 

 

The throwaway line about "unelected bureaucrats in Brussels" is just that a throwaway line without any substance.

 

As Michel Barnier said, "There are no winners with Brexit".

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Sunak didn’t ‘ruin BREXIT’, it is the failure it was always going to be.

 

Nobody claimed he did.

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

The Tories didn’t’ let Labour in’ the electorate made that decision.

 

Labour got in by default. Still, at least it will only be 1 term. 

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Sunak had is chance, he lined the pockets of the rich while stripping money from the rest of society.

 

No he didn't. It's Labour taxing the life out of the populace. 

 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

Renewables and net zero are creating jobs and boosting the economy, something Sunak failed to do.

 

 

 

No they aren't. It is increasing the cost of energy for working people. The ones that Labour pretend to represent. 

45 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So May ruined Brexit? So, usual question(s), Jonny, which I expect you will avoid answering once again.

 

What does this utopian Brexit look like, and how should/ could it (have) be(en) achieved?

 

We've been over this at least a dozen times. You can refer to my previous posts. 

 

Alternatively, you'll find out how it should have looked when Reform get in at the next GE. Farage is going to do a Trump and blow your silly Woke/doomsday/EU cult ideology out of the water. 

Britain has been blessed with significant reserves of oil, coal and gas. Not to fully exploit them is a betrayal of the British people.

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

why haven't successive UK governments been able to introduce measures which would do the trick?

 

Lack of will.

 

We now have the ability to stop it but unfortunately Labour got in and they are anti-Britain. 

 

Farage will show you how to do it after the next GE. 

Question: the average person in the UK is poor compared to the average person in the USA.

Why?

30 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

We've been over this at least a dozen times. You can refer to my previous posts. 

 

Alternatively, you'll find out how it should have looked when Reform get in at the next GE. Farage is going to do a Trump and blow your silly Woke/doomsday/EU cult ideology out of the water. 

You’ve not seen the latest polling:

 

Farage’s fawning around Trump is costing him support.

 

Your fantasy of importing Trump’s madness to the UK is folly, by the time of the next UK election comes around Trump will be out of office and the damage his policies have done will be on full display.

 

Meanwhile even Badenoch has, with many Tories, come around to accepting the UK needs to work with the EU to fill the gap Trump has created.

 

You should take some time to enjoy Farage wallowing about as he tries to reset his messaging on Trump and Europe:

 

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51739-how-have-recent-developments-in-ukraine-affected-favourability-ratings

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, zombie nights said:

Question: the average person in the UK is poor compared to the average person in the USA.

Why?

Is that even true?

 

Nobody in the UK is bankrupted by medical bills.

 

Net zero implies replacing one type of technology with another and a new way of living. This has happened throughout history. Horse drawn carriages were pollution-free but were replaced with motor vehicles. What happened to the footmen? Got new jobs. Knocker uppers were replaced by alarm clocks.

If eventually greenhouse gasses will be reduced, fine. Goodbye coal miners, hello rare earth miners. 

There are always those who want to retain the status quo. Even Luddites who wanted to destroy the modern industrial revolution. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

35 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nobody in the UK is bankrupted by medical bills.

 

No, they die before they can get an NHS appointment.

 

Unless they are an immigrant of course. Front of the queue. 

37 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve not seen the latest polling:

 

Farage’s fawning around Trump is costing him support.

 

Your fantasy of importing Trump’s madness to the UK is folly, by the time of the next UK election comes around Trump will be out of office and the damage his policies have done will be on full display.

 

Meanwhile even Badenoch has, with many Tories, come around to accepting the UK needs to work with the EU to fill the gap Trump has created.

 

You should take some time to enjoy Farage wallowing about as he tries to reset his messaging on Trump and Europe:

 

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51739-how-have-recent-developments-in-ukraine-affected-favourability-ratings

 

 

 

 

Long time to go Chomps.

 

The economy will be in the toilet after one Labour term, just as it always is.

 

We'll probably be at war as well.  

Speaking with my scientist hat on, a net-zero policy is a commendable idea.  But the target period to achieve net-zero should be set to something rather more realistic, such as 100 or 200 years.....

 

Technology is simply not ready to achieve net-zero in one or two decades.  Battery storage technology for wind and solar is way-behind in development of suitable renewable energy storage when there's no sun and no wind.

 

Right now, we are 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'.  Not using our cheap fossil fuel supplies for Drax is ludicrous, when we are importing biomass fuel from Canada and the associated huge carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation.

 

'Learn to walk before you try to run Milliband...'

12 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

No, they die before they can get an NHS appointment.

 

Unless they are an immigrant of course. Front of the queue. 

There’s been a change of Government Jonny.

 

The NHS is getting back to be the much loved institution it was the last time Labour were in power:

 

https://news.sky.com/story/extra-two-million-nhs-appointments-in-labours-first-five-months-figures-show-13310872

3 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Speaking with my scientist hat on, a net-zero policy is a commendable idea.  But the target period to achieve net-zero should be set to something rather more realistic, such as 100 or 200 years.....

 

Technology is simply not ready to achieve net-zero in one or two decades.  Battery storage technology for wind and solar is way-behind in development of suitable renewable energy storage when there's no sun and no wind.

 

Right now, we are 'robbing Peter to pay Paul'.  Not using our cheap fossil fuel supplies for Drax is ludicrous, when we are importing biomass fuel from Canada and the associated huge carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation.

 

'Learn to walk before you try to run Milliband...'

And yet the technology is improving rapidly.

 

And of course wind energy is only one part of the Renewables available to the UK.

 

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And yet the technology is improving rapidly.

 

And of course wind energy is only one part of the Renewables available to the UK.

 

Yes. there are other renewables, such as ocean wave kinetic energy, which is still somewhat in its infancy - technology-wise.  But it all seems to come back to the problem of efficient energy storage during outage time from solar, wind, wave etc. 

 

It's getting there, but trying to achieve net-zero on Milliband's timescales is crazy!

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

We've been over this at least a dozen times. You can refer to my previous posts. 

 

Alternatively, you'll find out how it should have looked when Reform get in at the next GE. Farage is going to do a Trump and blow your silly Woke/doomsday/EU cult ideology out of the water. 

 

So yet another non-answer. 'In Nigel, we trust'.

 

Let's face it, (almost?) all you 'hard' Brexiters don't have the foggiest idea what you want and even if you did, you wouldn't have a clue about how to achieve it.

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So yet another non-answer. 'In Nigel, we trust'.

 

Let's face it, (almost?) all you 'hard' Brexiters don't have the foggiest idea what you want and even if you did, you wouldn't have a clue about how to achieve it.

I believe a trade deal with the U.S. on very easy terms was on the wish list.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And yet the technology is improving rapidly.

 

And of course wind energy is only one part of the Renewables available to the UK.

 

And along with solar are useless without wind and sun.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Lack of will.

 

We now have the ability to stop it but unfortunately Labour got in and they are anti-Britain. 

 

Farage will show you how to do it after the next GE. 

 

We have had 4 PMs (3 Tories) since we left the EU and not one of them has been successful in stopping illegal immigration, so that blows the theory that it is solely down to Labour sky high.

 

Unless you want to go down the avenue of blowing the boats out of the water and all that entails, then it's difficult to see what deterrents can be effective. Farage may be many things, but I doubt that he is a cold-blooded killer. As for dealing with the root cause(s) of the problem, I very much doubt that Farage has any more idea than anyone else in Europe.

 

Labour is not anti-Britain. Most of the voices that are seem to originate from disgruntled expats.