Net Zero in the Crosshairs: Conservatives' shift on climate policy (the politics of pragmatism)

In 2025, the UK Conservative Party, under Kemi Badenoch's leadership, broke decades of cross-party consensus on climate, dropping support for net zero by 2050 and pledging to repeal the Climate Change Act 2008. This marks a populist pivot (or should that be u-turn?) that places emphasis on affordability, energy security, and "pragmatic" low-carbon tech over statutory timelines.

While retaining some clean energy elements from the 2024 manifesto, the focus is heavy criticism of "costly" targets, contrasting Labour's Clean Power 2030 ambition.

What does it include?

• Replacing the Climate Change Act and prioritizing cheap, reliable, abundant energy.

• Maximising North Sea oil and gas extraction by ending any ban on new licenses to strengthen energy security and reduce dependence on foreign energy.

• Scrapping the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate and the 2030 ban on new petrol and diesel cars, arguing for consumer freedom of choice.

• Expediting investment in nuclear energy, including approving two new SMR (Small Modular Reactor) fleets and progressing existing projects like Wylfa, Hinkley Point, and Sizewell.

• Retaining the existing Energy Profit Levy until 2028-2029 at the same level, with no changes to the levy or allowances.

• Supporting onshore wind projects with local area consent rights and supporting solar in specific areas, but with restrictions on agricultural land use. 

The Political Messaging: Populism and Net Zero

Where the Conservatives’ Clean Power Plan really departs from traditional climate strategies is in its rhetoric and positioning:

1. Net Zero as a Burden on Households

Senior party figures have amplified the argument that aggressive net zero timelines, especially Labour’s clean power by 2030 plan, risk burdening households with higher bills and unnecessary costs. They claim that a “fairer” approach is to slow the pace and prioritise affordability. This positioning is reinforced by recent media reports asserting that the net zero transition could add hundreds of pounds annually to bills, claims that have been used to question the value of ambitious climate targets and an easy broadside at Labour's manifesto pledge of saving each household £300 on their annual bill.

2. A Tactical Attack on Labour’s Climate Ambitions

By juxtaposing Conservatives’ “pragmatic” stance with Labour’s more aggressive climate goals, such as clean power by 2030 and publicly financed vehicles like GB Energy, the Conservative narrative seeks to cast Labour’s plan as “expensive, unrealistic and out of touch with voters’ concerns”. This contrast is being pushed in media coverage and public statements, often with the implication that decarbonisation itself harms economic growth. It is a major weapon during the current cost of living crisis and a very strong tactical attack on Labour's haphazard, u-turn heavy approach to politics.

3. Aligning Climate Policy with Voter Concerns

Some Conservative strategists appear to believe that net zero has become a divisive issue that can be framed as a cost-of-living burden or technocratic imposition from elites, rather than a broadly popular environmental goal. There is clear evidence that this narrative is being adopted internally, with party leaders echoing comments that net zero policy needs to change to reflect “real affordability challenges” for voters.

Reception: Public, Business and Sectoral Responses

Public Opinion

Data suggests that much of the UK public remains supportive of net zero and clean energy even if cost concerns are salient. Polling has shown a majority still back net zero goals and see climate action as important, including among Conservative voters prior to the shift in party rhetoric.

This disconnect highlights a challenge for the Conservatives’ repositioning: the political framing of net zero as costly does not fully align with underlying voter preferences, which often show strong concern about climate change alongside interest in affordability and fairness.

Business and Industry

Most business and investor organisations continue to urge the government not to retreat from net zero commitments, warning that stable, long-term targets have been crucial in driving investment, particularly in renewable technologies and clean innovation.

The Confederation of British Industry, for example, has argued that net zero is an economic growth opportunity and should not be rolled back as a matter of political expediency.

Environmental and Scientific Community

Scientists and environment groups have been vocally critical of any attempt to diminish statutory net zero targets or delay action, arguing that the 2050 deadline is based on scientific necessity rather than political whim. They stress that weakening targets risks undermining both climate outcomes and the UK’s reputation as a climate leader.

Is there a wider need to shift the nation's approach to net zero?

The Conservatives’ repositioned clean power strategy, and the broader questioning of net zero as a political priority, does raise serious questions about how the UK builds consensus and commitment around climate policy:

Clarity vs. Consistency

A core component of successful energy transitions globally is policy clarity and long-term commitment. Frequent shifts in targets or rhetoric undermine investor confidence and delay private capital mobilisation, precisely when the UK needs rapid clean energy deployment.

Cost Messaging vs. Economic Reality

Political debates often emphasise upfront costs without balancing the long-term economic benefits of decarbonisation — including lower energy bills over time, energy independence, job creation in clean industries, and avoided climate impacts.

The Risk of Short-Termism

Shifting net zero policy for electoral goals risks the very “short-term thinking” critics on both sides decry. Climate change is inherently a long-term problem requiring stable frameworks. If net zero becomes a political football, neither side can deliver effective outcomes.

Conclusion: A Political Positioning Device

The Conservatives’ current Clean Power orientation, blending support for low-carbon technologies with criticism of traditional net zero framing, is less a coherent climate strategy and more a political positioning device aimed at competing with Labour on energy costs and growth narratives.

On its own, it doesn’t yet constitute a fully developed alternative to net zero pathways grounded in science and long-term investment. But politically, it signals a widening gulf between parties on how to frame climate action.

If this becomes central to national debate, it may force a rethinking of how net zero policy is communicated and delivered: focusing not just on environmental goals, but on fairness, cost transparency, energy security, and economic opportunity in ways that resonate with broad voter segments. It triggers a need for the current government to improve its narrative on net zero - we've yet to come across a member of the public who can explain current energy pricing, or how the £300 energy bill savings are to be calculated (although with the latter, you could also argue that about any current government Minister!).

Ultimately, the UK’s future energy and climate success will depend less on who wins the next election, and more on whether policymakers can build a stable, long-term consensus that balances short-term economic pressures with the hard science of climate reality. What is for certain is that net zero has become a major political battleground, not just in the UK, but across the globe and it is only going to get worse as the election cycle gets closer.