Ed Miliband is a bad environmentalist

Ed Miliband might like to think he’s Britain’s foremost environmentalist, but he is arguably one of the worst advocates for climate action you could imagine. In trying to “save” the environment, he is doing more to harm it than help it. 

This might appear to be a bold claim considering that Miliband, since taking over the energy brief in 2020, has done everything he can to become the Left’s environmental darling. 

But if he were an effective environmentalist, his approach, his priorities, and his policies would be entirely different. He has in fact been disastrous for climate action and environmental protection. 

There are two types of environmentalists. First, there are the grandstanders. They like to think they are doing the right thing — showing their dedication to the cause through tokenistic, hairshirt sacrifices. By virtue of their moral superiority, they expect you to stand in solidarity with them to save the planet. But, in fact, their approach is completely mistaken and usually the worst way to do climate action

Whether it is Greta Thunberg or your slightly quirky acquaintance who doesn’t shower to save water, we can all think of someone in this vein. They prioritise rationing and decline over abundance and growth. 

But these ideas are inherently poisonous to climate action, public support for it, and economic growth. 

Which is why, on the other side, you have sensible environmentalists who care more about outcomes over outputs. They recognise environmentalism is not a zero-sum game. A realistic, pragmatic approach is required. It must work alongside growth, abundance, and consumer choice. 

We need economic growth because, without it, we won’t create a better world for future generations, which is surely the whole point of being an environmentalist. Living in a greener world means nothing if it is not simultaneously a prosperous one. Additionally, growth also generates the means to take further action on environmental protection. 

The first way that Miliband has diverted from this unavoidable truth is the overuse of bans and regulation. This heavy handed, statist approach removes choice, which is essential for both prosperity and consumer buy-in. 

New, innovative, and clean technologies, and their British innovators, should compete in the market. In many cases, they are smarter, more efficient, and cheaper technology, meaning people will take up these technologies in their own right. The market and freedom of choice should be the main drivers of innovation and affordability. 

To state the obvious, climate action cannot happen in a silo. Government involvement is required to a certain extent. But those interventions should be to encourage uptake, not coerce it.

However, Miliband has instead turned to overbearing regulations and bans. This is a negative, rationing mentality and one that is detrimental for climate action. 

Take the ban on new petrol cars. EVs are coming to market thick and fast, and, with fuel prices near historic highs, there is more incentive than ever to buy them. 

But the policy to ban new petrol car sales is incredibly divisive and could potentially cause real pain for British households. All this does is feed opposition to climate action. 

Instead, we should be helping facilitate EV infrastructure and incentivise uptake. Charging has taken great leaps forward, but is still lagging behind due to complicated and restrictive regulations that make it harder for councils to install new charge points. Additionally, higher rates of VAT for off street parking still remain. 

Rather than looking to bans, we should be looking to cut regulations and taxes to make it easier for this clean tech to reach consumers and make their lives cleaner, better, and more affordable. 

Our approach to other clean technologies should be no different. 

The best thing we can do to drive uptake is to cut electricity costs. This makes them cheaper to run and therefore more affordable for hard-pressed consumers. 

Think I’m a lone environmentalist in this way of thinking? Even the Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) recent progress report highlighted the importance of lowering electricity bills. 

Alas, Miliband is not a sensible environmentalist. And his policies have driven up bills, rather than brought them down. Long gone are the days of his promising to bring down energy bills by £300. 

Let’s start with the 2030 Clean Power target (CP30) and its aim to have 95 per cent clean energy by the end of the decade. This prioritises rolling out as much clean energy as possible, rather than delivering clean energy at the lowest possible cost. Clean energy like wind and solar can provide affordable, homegrown electricity, but not when it is rushed out with no regard for cost. More competition in clean energy auctions would mean more negotiating leverage for the Government and cheaper prices for consumers.

Then there is the unionisation of the wind industry. Effectively, if wind investors want to take part in future auction rounds, they have to massively expand union access to their workers, increasing upward pressures on consumer bills.

To actually help Britain decarbonise and create a better world for tomorrow, economic growth, consumer choice, and cheaper bills must be the order of the day. 

Miliband is choosing to ignore the effective way to do climate action

This isn’t a radical way of thinking. But Miliband is choosing to ignore the effective way to do climate action. His motives might not be bad, but his methods are.

Environmental policy should be about creating a cleaner, more prosperous, and affordable world. But the Left has taken what was once a noble cause and reconstructed it into an ineffective mess that is taking us in the wrong direction. 

Ed Miliband is a bad environmentalist. And it is time we call him out for it.