Following your report about the Net Zero Scrutiny Group of MPs (Tories fighting net zero plans are dragging climate into new culture war, experts say, 8 February), we hope this letter, supported by all-party parliamentary groups, will reassure your readers and the public that parliamentarians who are not fully behind net zero are a small minority.
Our groups are supported by hundreds of parliamentarians, from all major parties, representing the full geography of the UK. We recognise that all our 2019 election manifestos committed to net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner. We recognise the environment is now a top concern of the British public. And we recognise the spiralling climate crisis and the urgent need to transition to a more sustainable economy.
There are different approaches to reach net zero, but we all support the goal. Delaying action will cost the country more, as the Treasury and the Office for Budget Responsibility have made clear. In the national interest, we will continue to support and promote ambitious environmental leadership in parliament.
Anthony Browne MP Environment APPG, Caroline Lucas MP Climate change APPG, Sir Ed Davey MP Sustainable finance APPG, Peter Aldous MP Intelligent energy APPG, Alex Sobel MP Net zero APPG, Geraint Davies MP Clean air APPG, Ben Lake MP Fuel poverty and energy efficiency APPG, Helene Hayman Co-chair, Peers for the Planet
• Business Green’s editor, James Murray, is correct that to undermine the claims of the pro-fossil fuel Net Zero Scrutiny Group, it is vital to explain how the enormous upfront costs of the transition to net zero can be met, but not at the expense of the poor (‘It’s all a bit cynical’: the politicians behind the Tory attack on net zero agenda, 8 February).
The fact is that a just transition to net zero is easily affordable, and poorer people and the increasingly squeezed middle class won’t have to suffer in the process. Of course, a windfall tax on Shell’s and BP’s present licence to print money is a key first step, but the question is, where will the bulk of the many tens of billions that are required come from? The key to answering this is to realise that the entire cost of tackling the Covid crisis was funded by a £450bn expansion of the quantitative easing programme. This money creation programme now needs to be expanded again to fund a post-Covid recovery that tackles not just the climate emergency, but also the cost-of-living crisis and the inequality of social provision.
Also crucial will be the use of government incentivised savings, such as pensions and ISAs, and a fairer taxation system to help achieve these goals.
Colin Hines
Convener, UK Green New Deal Group
• How depressing, but not surprising, to read your articles on the Net Zero Scrutiny Group. I am 80 years old; I have studied many short courses with the Open University and Future Learn on various environmental subjects, especially those examining the causes and effects of manmade climate change. All these courses emphasise that mitigation to reduce the amount of global heating will be financially much cheaper than adapting to it.
I have been on many protests against the climate crisis. I try to live as green a life as possible. I and many others feel betrayed by politicians and scientists such as Steve Koonin, who say “there is no climate crisis”. I hope Prof Koonin does not have grandchildren who will look back in 30 years’ time and say: “Grandpa knew what to do, but he didn’t do it.”
Rose Harvie
Dumbarton, West Dunbartonshire
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
