GB News panel debates scrapping net zero as parties split

A panel debate on whether Britain should scrap its net zero target set out the political choice now facing the main parties. Labour has kept its environmental policies, while the Conservatives and Reform have pledged to ditch the target. The segment framed the question as the "ultimate debate of our times" and put one speaker for scrapping the policy against one speaker defending it.

The case for scrapping focused on cost and competitiveness. The pro-scrap speaker argued that net zero drives British businesses overseas, taking jobs and tax revenue with them. He said families struggling to heat their homes and put food on the table should not carry the cost of a government climate target. He also pointed to Britain producing only 1% of global CO2 emissions and questioned whether UK action would make a meaningful difference to global temperature rise. Energy security was another theme. As an island, he said, Britain should onshore its energy and use its own resources rather than import fossil fuels. He asked whether taxpayers could realistically afford the deadlines.

The case against scrapping accepted that the policy has been too dogmatic but rejected the idea that it can simply be cut out of the economy. The anti-scrap speaker said net zero does not have to mean the current approach. He noted that Labour is looking at North Sea oil and may reopen oil fields, though he called the basin declining and not a silver bullet. He accepted there are big spending line items but said net zero is part of a levelling up story and a major part of the economy. He cited 1.1 million full-time jobs in net zero adjacent industries, £105 billion in gross value added, an 11% wage premium compared with average jobs, and higher productivity. He added that £455 billion of energy infrastructure is already in the pipeline, including projects in Yorkshire. He said a mayor in Yorkshire and Humberside had split from Reform on some net zero issues because of the green jobs in his area. Scrapping the target now, he argued, would give away part of the economy and create investor uncertainty after years of cross-party government policy, including the Climate Change Act and the 2019 law that set the 2050 target. He also said gas dependency is a real risk for an island nation, and that net zero and renewables are part of the route to energy independence.

The two speakers clashed over the grid and the pace of change. The pro-scrap speaker said the grid cannot cope with intermittent renewables, claiming wind farms have been switched off because the infrastructure cannot consume the power. The anti-scrap speaker agreed the grid is under pressure and needs upgrading. He argued that many net zero costs are baked into any alternative scenario, that gas-fired power plants cannot be built overnight, and that grid and transmission investment would be needed anyway.

The debate also touched on electric cars and housing. One speaker asked how people without driveways would charge electric cars. The pro-scrap side cited Wimpey Homes saying it would stop building in London because costs, including a requirement to prove a 30-year biodiversity gain, made schemes unprofitable. The other speaker said that biodiversity rule had nothing to do with net zero and that the Labour government has introduced measures to remove such requirements. He also cited a procurement announcement that stops social value measures being added to contracts and increasing costs. The host said one speaker's argument boiled down to two main points before the segment moved on. The exchange ended without a resolution, reflecting the wider political split over the target.