Connect with us

Politics

Olivia Blake: ‘Why cross-party leadership on climate policy is essential’

Published

on

MDU logo

It’s official. The Conservative Party leadership has joined the ranks of climate deniers, in a race to the bottom with Nigel Farage and Donald Trump to see whose head can sink deepest into the sand.

Kemi Badenoch’s speech at her party conference last week smashed a decades-long consensus that our climate is changing, and getting to net zero is the only way to arrest that change before it is too late for human life to survive.

This was once uncontroversial. In 2019, when the UK parliament enshrined a net zero by 2050 target into law, MPs simply nodded it through; no vote was even required. Cutting emissions and restoring nature was not a partisan issue. It was widely accepted as a matter of national interest. Whether Labour or Conservative, we understood the stakes were too high to act alone. The public would never forgive inaction, and nor could we forgive ourselves.

There should be no illusions about the source of this breakdown in consensus. It comes from a coordinated, well-funded, international network of political actors who thrive on division and chaos. The beginnings of this fracture in our politics was never clearer than at last year’s election, when Reform launched their anti-science campaign, pledging to ‘scrap net zero to lower energy bills’. In 2024, the same year Reform made this commitment, the UK’s net zero economy expanded by 10%, a rate three times that of the overall UK economy.

Advertisement

It’s not the public that will benefit from ‘cutting net zero’, nor will it help their bills, it’s the vested interests that are funding parties such as Reform, 92% of whose donations came from oil and gas, polluting industries, and climate deniers from 2019-24.

To say that scrapping the Climate Change Act will bring about growth, cheaper energy, and help protect the natural landscapes we all love is more than misleading – it’s an utter fallacy.

Net zero is a proven, powerful tool for investment and certainty. And more than this, we need a rapid transition to net zero to secure energy sovereignty, free ourselves from dependence on dictators – and shield our economies from the soaring prices driven by conflict. If you want lower bills, we need the Climate Change Act intact.

Meanwhile, if we don’t continue to cut emissions at pace, nature will be further destroyed by increasingly erratic and dangerous weather. In turn this diminishes nature’s capacity to store and draw down carbon – and its ability to protect us from the worst impacts of climate change by soaking up flood water, providing shade and diminishing the potency of storms. We know that the climate and nature crisis are deeply interlinked and can only be tackled together. As experts warned us in 2021, ‘we solve both, or we solve neither’.

Advertisement

The UK is a nature-proud nation, celebrating its diverse ecosystems from rare chalk streams to ancient woodlands. Research shows that across society we are fiercely proud of our national parks, nature charities, forests, and footpaths. This makes protecting and restoring our ecosystems, habitats and species a central responsibility of any government.

Make no mistake, this is the fight of our lifetime. A well-funded network may try to tell you otherwise, but the science is unequivocal, and failing to act on the dual climate and nature crisis would be the gravest betrayal of our nation’s future. It will deny our children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews the access to the natural environment and clean air we have taken for granted. It’s time to double down, not run away.

Many of us in parliament continue to drive action on climate change. This is not a party issue; it is putting the country first. To that end, I am chairing a new cross-party Climate and Nature Crisis Caucus to be the voice of citizens who are proud of their environment, want a better future for the next generation, and understand that now is not the time to shy away.  We will not be cowed in the battle for our planet’s future.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Healey: British Government Now Considering Raising Terrorist Threat Level

Published

on

Healey: British Government Now Considering Raising Terrorist Threat Level

Healey: British Government Now Considering Raising Terrorist Threat Level

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Exclusive footage shows Iranian missiles over Doha

Published

on

Exclusive footage shows Iranian missiles over Doha

Exclusive footage provided to Skwawkbox direct from migrant workers in Doha, Qatar shows large fires from Iranian missile strikes — and continuing barrages overnight from 28 February into the early hours of 1 March 2026.

Iran continues to strike US bases in Doha and Bahrain in retaliation for illegal and unprovoked US and Israeli attacks on its people:

While the air defences in Qatar appear to intercept some of the barrage, other missiles are clearly getting through. The US has tried to deny significant damage to its bases, but at least some of its radar facilities in the region have been destroyed.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Many of Trump’s own voters didn’t want to attack Iran. Now he has to win them over.

Published

on

Many of Trump’s own voters didn’t want to attack Iran. Now he has to win them over.

President Donald Trump’s overnight strikes are forcing a hypothetical debate into reality.

And a president with extraordinary control over his party’s base will test how far his supporters will follow him on an issue that polling showed divided his coalition.

Just half of 2024 Trump voters, 50 percent, supported military action in a POLITICO poll last month — but 30 percent opposed it. Those fractures, combined with largely unified opposition from Democrats, meant Americans broadly did not want an attack on Iran.

In the January POLITICO poll, nearly half of Americans, 45 percent, said the United States should not take military action in Iran; fewer than one-third, 31 percent, said it should. An Economist/YouGov poll conducted last weekend similarly found broad public opposition to military action in Iran.

Advertisement

The stakes are particularly high for a Republican Party already staring down a difficult midterm landscape, where even small defections from their winning 2024 coalition could carry outsized consequences.

Part of the challenge for Trump is that support for military intervention in Iran was strongest among Trump’s base — and far weaker outside of it. A 61 percent majority of Trump voters who self-identified as “MAGA Republicans” said they support military action, according to The POLITICO Poll conducted Jan. 16 to 19, when Trump was ramping up his rhetoric against Iran but an outright attack remained hypothetical. That’s much higher than the 42 percent of Trump voters who do not identify as “MAGA” who said the same.

That leaves Trump navigating an evolving issue where support within his coalition — at least before the strikes — was real but not overwhelming and where overall public opposition outweighed support.

Democrats were largely unified. Two-thirds of voters who backed former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024 said the U.S. should not intervene in Iran, while just 18 percent said it should, the POLITICO survey conducted by Public First found. The Economist/YouGov found 76 percent of Democrats opposed an attack. That Democratic unity is a warning sign for the GOP: It means that before the strikes, there were not enough pro-intervention Democrats to offset the anti-intervention Republicans.

Advertisement

Trump has repeatedly demonstrated an ability to reshape Republican public opinion, bringing his voters along on issues including trade and foreign policy. Whether that pattern holds here may depend on how the conflict unfolds.

“The political risk depends on the outcome,” Michigan-based Republican strategist Jason Roe told POLITICO. “If we break Iran without terrorist attacks coming to America or harm coming to allies in the region, it will be a political win for Trump. … If this expands into a protracted conflict, or ends up with troops on the ground, it will be a liability.”

That dynamic underscores the broader tension inside the modern GOP — a party base deeply loyal to the president and largely unified around an “America First” prerogative, now being tested by his own foreign policy decisions.

The divide also illustrates the longtime debate within the Republican Party between the hawks favoring a more aggressive posture on the world stage and those skeptical of intervention.

Advertisement

Mercedes Schlapp, a senior fellow at the Conservative Political Action Conference, said the length and severity of conflict could determine how Trump’s MAGA base responds.

“I think that the MAGA base will make it very loud and clear to the President that they will not necessarily agree, if it becomes a situation that it becomes a prolonged war,” she said on C-SPAN’s Ceasefire earlier this week.

Polling was already showing early signs of skepticism about overseas entanglements, including among Republicans. A February POLITICO Poll found that 47 percent of Americans said the U.S. government is too focused on international issues and not focused enough on domestic ones, while roughly one-quarter said it is striking the right balance.

The question did not reference Trump directly. Even so, 41 percent of his 2024 voters said the U.S. government is too focused on international issues, including about half — 49 percent — of Trump voters who do not consider themselves MAGA Republicans.

Advertisement

Those non-MAGA Trump voters are especially important for the GOP heading into November, and the president’s ability to overcome their initial opposition could prove crucial to maintaining control of Congress. Otherwise, if they swing back to Democrats — or sit out the midterms — Trump’s base alone is not enough to carry his party to midterm successes.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Why Does My Mind Race At Night? It Could Be Your Body Clock

Published

on

Why Does My Mind Race At Night? It Could Be Your Body Clock

Researchers increasingly think that our Circadian rhythm, or body clock, matters more to our sleep than we realise. In fact, one study suggested our internal rhythm might matter more than sleep duration when it comes to feeling rested.

And in an Australian paper, which was published in Sleep Medicine, researchers found that people who struggle with racing thoughts that keep them up at night seem to have differences in their Circadian rhythm.

“Unlike good sleepers, whose cognitive state shifted predictably from daytime problem-solving to nighttime disengagement, those with insomnia failed to downshift as strongly,” the study’s lead researcher, Professor Kurt Lushington, said.

Why might people with racing thoughts at night have different body clocks?

Advertisement

In this research, scientists placed 32 adults (half of whom had insomnia; the other half were healthy sleepers) in an environment with as few external body clock cues as possible.

They were placed in a bed in a dimly-lit room for 24 hours, with carefully-measured food and activity. This was done to isolate the participant’s Circadian rhythms.

The scientists noticed that, even with no factors like sunlight, most participants’ body clock worked roughly in tandem in the daytime: their mental acitivty was highest in the morning and tapered off in the afternoon.

But among the insomniacs, whose racing thoughts kept them up at night, some differences were noted later on.

Advertisement

Not only was their “cognitive peak” – the time at which their mind was busiest – 6.5 hours later, on average, than those without insomnia, but, Dr Lushington said, “Their thought patterns stayed more daytime-like in the nighttime hours when the brain should be quietening”.

Sleep, he added, is “about the brain disengaging from goal-directed thought and emotional involvement.

“Our study shows that in insomnia, this disengagement is blunted and delayed, likely due to circadian rhythm abnormalities. This means that the brain doesn’t receive strong signals to ‘power down’ at night.”

Is there anything I can do to stop my brain racing at night?

Advertisement

According to study co-author Professor Jill Dorrian, this research could help to guide insomnia treatments which focus on sufferers’ body clocks in the future.

“These include timed light exposure and structured daily routines that may restore the natural day-night variation in thought patterns,” she said (sleep experts have previously recommended getting some outdoor morning light if you can, as this helps to regulate our Circadian rhythm).

Additionally, Professor Dorrian ended, “Practising mindfulness may also help quieten the mind at night”.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

UK Defence Secretary John Healey Silent On Iran Strikes Support

Published

on

UK Defence Secretary John Healey Silent On Iran Strikes Support

John Healey has refused to say whether the UK government backs the US and Israeli bombing of Iran which killed the country’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The defence secretary would only confirm that Britain “played no part” in the military action.

Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard confirmed in the early hours of Sunday that Khamenei had died, and said it would launch its “most-intense offensive operation” against American and Israeli targets in response.

That led to Donald Trump warning they “better not do that, because if they do we will hit them with a force that has never been seen before”.

Advertisement

Countries across the Middle East have already been attacked by Iran as tensions in the region threaten to explode into a full-blown war

Nevertheless, Healey refused to be drawn on the government’s position when asked by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.

She asked the cabinet minister whether he thought the American and Israeli action was “reckless or do you think it was right”?

Healey said: “We played no part in these strikes as Britain.”

Advertisement

But Kuenssberg told him: “We know that, you’ve said that already. But this is a moment of history.

“Everyone watching this morning will want to know and expect to know from their government is Britain on the side of those two countries who have killed Iran’s Supreme Leader?”

Healey said: “I think people watching will want to know now, today, that Britain is on top of what’s necessary to do what we can to keep them safe, to reinforce regional stability, prevent further escalation, and that’s my task and that’s my priority as defence secretary of the UK.”

The US and Israel described Saturday’s attacks on Iran as a “pre-emptive” strike against a Tehran government intent on developing nuclear weapons.

Advertisement

It retaliation from Iran, with strikes reported in several Gulf countries including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

In a statement from Downing Street on Saturday, Keir Starmer said the UK “played no role” in the strikes on Iran.

“But we have long been clear – the regime in Iran is utterly abhorrent,” he added.

“They have murdered thousands of their own people, brutally crushed dissent, and sought to destabilise the region.”

Advertisement

Starmer said Iran “must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon” and called for the resumption of diplomatic efforts to prevent that from happening.

He said: “Iran can end this now. They should refrain from further strikes, give up their weapons programmes, and cease the appalling violence and repression against the Iranian people – who deserve the right to determine their own future, in line with our longstanding position.

“That is the route to de-escalation and back to the negotiating table.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

“Few people will mourn the Ayatollah’s death” – Healey

Published

on

"Few people will mourn the Ayatollah's death" - Healey

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Bahrain citizens cheer as Iranian missiles strike US base

Published

on

Bahrain citizens cheer as Iranian missiles strike US base

Bahrainis have been filmed cheering “like it’s New Year’s fireworks” as a new barrage of Iranian missiles hit a US base in Bahrain:

The footage brings to mind scenes from the June 2025 ’12-day war’ in which Palestinians cheered as they watched Iranian missiles slam into their oppressor’s military facilities.

The small island in the Persian Gulf, which was a British protectorate (also read: colony) in the 19th century, has a majority Shia population and a Sunni king. In 2011, Bahrain saw a popular uprising violently crushed by an army from Saudi Arabia and its allies, which remain stationed (also read as occupying) on the island.

Iran’s strikes on the US and Israel are in retaliation for the axis’s unprovoked attacks on Iran, which murdered hundreds on 28 February 2026, including at least 85 schoolgirls and their teachers.

Advertisement

Featured image via the Canary

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Healey: “Britain played no part in the strikes on Iran”

Published

on

Healey: “Britain played no part in the strikes on Iran”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

John Healey Refuses Six Times to Say if UK Backs Strikes on Iran

Published

on

John Healey Refuses Six Times to Say if UK Backs Strikes on Iran

John Healey Refuses Six Times to Say if UK Backs Strikes on Iran

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Zack Polanski Defends Iranian Regime: It Was Already at the Negotiating Table

Published

on

Zack Polanski Defends Iranian Regime: It Was Already at the Negotiating Table

Zack Polanski Defends Iranian Regime: It Was Already at the Negotiating Table

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025