The plan outlines how the UK will meet the targets of the country’s so-called carbon budget
London:
The High Court ruled on Friday that the UK government acted unlawfully by approving elements of its plans to meet net zero emissions targets based on “vague and unquantified” information.
It is the second time in two years that the court has ruled that ministers are not following the UK’s own laws on climate change. A judge made a similar ruling in 2022.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, in power since October that year, has faced persistent criticism that he is watering down the country’s commitment to net zero targets following a series of climate policy reversals.
Friday’s decision was prompted by a legal challenge from campaign groups Friends of the Earth, ClientEarth and the Good Law Project. It means ministers must revamp part of their net-zero emissions plans.
“This is yet another embarrassing defeat for the government and its reckless and inadequate climate plans,” said Friends of the Earth lawyer Katie de Kauwe.
The groups took joint legal action against the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero over their March 2023 decision to approve the Carbon Budget Delivery Plan (CBDP).
The plan outlines how the UK will meet the targets of the country’s so-called carbon budget, which runs until 2037, as part of wider efforts to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
They argued that the relevant Secretary of State at the time, Grant Shapps, did not have important information about whether individual policies could be implemented, but approved them anyway.
This violated the Climate Change Act of 2008, which requires due diligence in emissions reduction targets and strategies, the groups said.
Supreme Court Justice Clive Sheldon agreed, calling the plan presented to Shapps for approval “vague and unquantified” and saying it lacked “sufficient” information.
“It is not possible to determine… which of the proposals and policies would not be delivered at all, or in full”, he concluded.
A spokesperson for the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero insisted that “the claims in this case were largely about process and the judgment contains no criticism of the detailed plans we have in place.
“We do not believe that a lawsuit over the lawsuit represents the best way to drive progress toward our shared goal of achieving net zero,” the spokesperson added.
(Except the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
This story originally appeared on Ndtv.com read the full story
