“[N]et zero is the economic opportunity of our generation,” claimed the Conservatives’ Ben Houchen, the Mayor of the Tees Valley, and MP Chris Skidmore in a recent article for The Times RedBox. The piece combined the worst elements of British politics — plans for more devolution and the kamikaze green agenda — with a sick-making dollop of sanctimony. One that says “I’m a good Tory; please like me!”

Far from this enthusing the electorate, one wonders if they will be mystified as to why politicians keep pushing this agenda, which former chancellor Lord Lawson once called “suicidal”. Perhaps they would be interested to see Skidmore’s Registered Interests page. It offers an insight into his eco evangelism, showing that he is paid £80,000 a year as an “Adviser to the Emissions Capture Company (industrial decarbonisation and clean technology)”. 

Just like Skidmore, the CCC has links to green business

Skidmore is far from the only one involved in extracurricular green activity. The most staggering example is the Climate Change Committee (CCC), “an independent, statutory body”, which informs the UK and devolved governments’ eco policies. Some say it is completely in the driving seat. In 2019, for instance, it recommended the adoption of net zero greenhouse emissions by the UK by 2050, and the Government subsequently amended the Climate Change Act (2008), with Skidmore photographed signing the legislation, to fulfil this goal.

Just like Skidmore, the CCC has links to green business. Lord Deben, Chair of the Committee is Chairman and shareholder of Sancroft International Ltd, which helps “some of the world’s leading companies improve their environmental, ethical and social impact”. Others on the team work for Ørsted, whose “vision is a world that runs entirely on green energy” and The Carbon Trust, “an expert partner for businesses, governments and organisations around the world — helping them decarbonise and accelerate to Net Zero”. 

All of this information is on the CCC’s website in a spreadsheet, which is interesting to look at for two reasons. One is that it’s been filled somewhat sloppily. For instance, Piers Forster, a member, says that he owns a “small number of shares” in Ørsted, with no description of what “small” means. He also spells Ørsted differently to Baroness Brown of Cambridge, who has used the correct orthography. In other places it’s not obvious what CCC members’ precise relationships with firms are. The forms have the feel of people quickly finishing off their admin, perhaps expecting others to not be particularly interested in the content.

Second, and related to this, is that the information is all in plain sight, under part of the website called “transparency”. The strange thing about the word “transparency” is that it can make people switch off. The tendency is to think that politicians’ and political bodies’ financial interests won’t be spelt out explicitly, so it’s not worth prying when they are. It’s unsurprising the CCC aren’t bothered about consistency in how they spell things.

Quangos make our democracy more susceptible to the influence of money

I am not accusing Skidmore or CCC members of anything. They could be the most objective, scientific and rational advisers to the government. It’s just not clear how either could be “independent” in their roles. The fact they can financially gain from environmental policy probably means they aren’t best placed to adjudicate on it.

At the very least, their interests should be balanced against others with a stake in Net Zero policies, including those in the motor industry — one of the most affected sectors — and oil and gas. It won’t happen though, as these companies must be “bad”, whereas anything to do with Net Zero and renewables can only ever be virtuous. The badge of being “environmentally friendly” gives people a certain immunity from scrutiny.

Can you imagine the noise if there were members of this committee who were paid by the automotive industry? Or the oil industry? Then, having banked their cheques, they dared to think and vote “the wrong way” on green issues? 

The existence of the CCC in itself will bewilder many voters, who may have never heard of it or realise that it has such a significant role in British politics. Launched in 2008, it is part of Tony Blair’s quangocracy legacy.

One of the problems with quangos is, like devolution, they splinter government so that it becomes a multitude of administrations. This splintering makes our democracy more susceptible to the influence of money, simply because there are increased channels into the heart of Westminster.

When the Establishment talks about monetary interference, it tends to point the finger at Tufton Street, rarely examining green industry. Our political system is open to influence across the spectrum, however. At the very least, we shouldn’t be surprised when politicians are so sure net zero “will leave us all richer”, as Houchen and Skidmore put it.