Ellie Craven and Laurence Fredricks: Tackling climate change is popular, the political divide is how you do it and what it costs

Ellie Craven and Laurence Fredricks are respectively a senior researcher and researcher at Onward.

Kemi Badenoch is being honest about net zero and has identified the need for a change of approach. Now in Opposition, the Conservative Party has the opportunity to be the pragmatic, sensible voice on climate and energy policies: one that sits between Labour’s too much too soon approach and Reform’s sceptical policies.

Onward’s latest report, Political Climate, shows the need for the Party to advocate for a strategy that appeals to its target voters who care about tackling climate change, but are concerned about the individual costs of doing so.

Polling conducted for Onward by More in Common surveyed over 3,000 people throughout the country and across different voting groups, going back to the 2017 General Election; 66 per cent of 2024 Conservative voters said that it is important to them to have a government that makes tackling climate change a priority, compared to 18 per cent who said it was unimportant.

Conservative target voters, that is people who have voted for the Conservatives in the 2017 and/ or 2019 elections but not in 2024, also think tackling climate change is important: 60 per cent think it is important compared to 23 per cent who think it is unimportant.

Amongst these voters, those who would return to the party soonest are more concerned about climate change; 60 per cent and 66 per cent of past voters who would vote Conservative again at the next election or in five to ten years, respectively, say having a government that prioritises climate change is important, compared to just over 50 per cent amongst those who would vote Conservative again in more than ten years or never.

Many Reform voters are not as climate sceptical either. Nearly half (45 per cent) of Reform voters think it is important that the Government makes tackling climate change a priority. Those who would return to the Conservatives the soonest are more positive about tackling climate change compared to those who would return later or never: two-thirds of Reform defectors who would return to the Conservative party either at the next election or within ten years think this is important.

But these groups have real concerns about the cost of tackling climate change and they don’t want to pay much more to do so. Political Climate finds that only five per cent and six per cent of Conservative voters and target voters, respectively, would prefer the Government increase individual taxes to fund climate policy. And nearly two-thirds of Conservative voters and target voters would either not accept any increase in their taxes or would accept just a £1-£10 increase a year.

Voters are also not enthusiastic about the Labour Government’s approach.

Onward’s polling found that Conservative voters and target voters think that Labour’s climate policies will be funded by increased taxes or irresponsible borrowing, a view shared by 43 per cent of all voters. And there is scepticism about GB Energy: 62 per cent of Conservative voters, 49 per cent of leaners and 39 per cent of all voters believe that GB Energy will be inefficient and end up costing taxpayers more.

Onward’s Jumping the Gun report takes a deeper look into the dangers of the Labour Government’s too-much-too-soon approach to the Energy Infrastructure Bill currently going through Parliament. Specifically, the report exhibits the risks of the current Government’s approach to the energy transition bringing voter concerns to fruition.

The UK requires an abundance of energy generation for security and costs. Renewables are a credible route to diversifying and bolstering domestic energy generation. But 2030 risks undermining voters’ support by increasing energy costs for consumers and ignoring the pragmatic path that could bolster stability.

There is a disconnect between the current deployment of generative renewables and transmission. So far, the government has approved 3GW of new renewable energy, and the pipeline of smaller renewable projects is growing at an accelerated pace. Transmission is stalling by comparison.

2030 is already at the limit of possibility: it would require completion of no fewer than 80 new transmission projects. Of these nine are complete, 68 are in the pipeline for 2030, and three are off track by one year. This delay alone is predicted to cost £4.2 billion a year, adding to energy bills – and undermining face-value polling support.

The UK struggles to build infrastructure, and 2030 is no mean feat. To achieve the current target, twice as much transmission infrastructure must be built in the next five years as the last decade. But there is no credible plan to ensure this will be the case.

Often it is local opposition to new pylons and overground transmission lines delaying transmission; forcing them through will be no alternative to electoral support. Nor is it a credible alternative to use community benefits as a free pass to build unpopular infrastructure without the will of the community when it is funded by consumer bills. This latter approach sets the precedent that the Government can make consumers pay those communities having to host unpopular infrastructure as in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill – which would likely exacerbate as more infrastructure will be required post 2030.

To maintain support for energy and environment policies costs must not increase, as they will under 2030. Therefore, a pragmatic solution is needed to strategically distribute the transmission infrastructure, in conjunction with renewables, so that it is acceptable to communities and limits consumer bill hikes.

Onward’s Jumping the Gun proposed a number of solutions to this, including community benefits funded by developers, a strategic planning approach that coordinates transmission infrastructure with generative renewables, a review of undergrounding versus overgrounding costs to update the last review conducted in 2012, and ultimately – a well thought out plan for renewable energy in the UK.

The Conservatives need to create dividing lines between themselves and the Government on climate and energy. Conservative voters and target voters clearly think tackling climate change is important, but they are worried about the pace and financial burden of Labour’s plans.

So, the dividing line should not be on the principle of tackling climate change, but on the process.