We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
Since the earliest investigations into public opinion on climate change, it’s been clear that the public expect and want the government to take the lead on climate change.
Famously, the UK’s Climate Change Act was world-leading when it was first passed – and in 2019, the central target was upgraded from an 80% cut in emissions to net-zero emissions by 2050.
But although claims of political leadership have persisted – including around the UK’s hosting of the annual UN climate conference in Glasgow in 2021 – periodic assessments by the Climate Change Committee have in recent years highlighted a slowing of progress, and explicitly called for the UK to ‘regain its international political leadership’.
Set against historically low trust in politicians and widespread disengagement from the political system, people nonetheless consistently say that the government should be doing and spending more on climate change.
This thread brings together relevant opinion data around political leadership (from the public and MPs through our Climate Barometer tracker), set against key policy developments that help make sense of if, how and why opinion is changing.
YouGov tracker polling from February 2024 shows the British public have a mixed response to governments announcing policy U-turns, with roughly even numbers overall saying it’s ‘a good sign – showing they are willing to listen and change their minds when people complain or situations change’ (36%), and saying it’s ‘a bad sign – showing they are incompetent, weak, or have not thought their policies through properly in advance’ (34%).
There are differences between voters though: Conservatives are more likely to look favourably upon government U-turns, with 51% seeing U-turns as a good thing. Those intending to vote Labour tend to lean the other way, with 41% opposing them.
In the context of the Labour Party’s announcement it will drop its prior commitment to spending £28 billion a year on green investment, Labour voters are unlikely to support it if they view it as a U-turn.
The Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s 2023 autumn statement was presented as a plan for growing the UK economy, and addressing cost of living pressures through tax cuts and other measures.
Analysis carried out by Carbon Brief found that Hunt used climate-related keywords less in his latest speech than in his first autumn statement in 2022, or in the spring statement earlier this year, and that he did not specifically mention “climate” at all.
The graph tells a story of the prominence and salience of climate change set against economic considerations at different moments in the past decade-and-a-half.
Writing for Labour List, More in Common’s Luke Tryl sets out why there is a chance to increase support among crucial ‘Red Wall’ voters (represented by the Loyal Nationals audience in More in Common’s Britain’s Choice model), arguing that:
Perhaps the area with the greatest potential lies in Labour’s green prosperity plan. Public support for the plan is high at 57%, rising to 61% among loyal national voters and a mammoth 84% among the group of voters who opted for the Conservatives in 2019 but who are now voting Labour.
Coupled with Public First polling showing that delaying net zero whilst failing to tax oil and gas companies is a vote loser, there is clearly a space for making a bolder, fair pitch to the electorate on green policies: consistent political leadership is an essential piece of the puzzle for building public support for the specifics of the transition.
Based on a survey of 2000 people, Public First have argued that a turn against net zero is a risky political maneuver: by testing different combinations of policy propositions with voters (on the environment and more widely) they found that green investment is one of the most universally popular offers across the electorate, and that whilst anti net-zero sentiment doesn’t move the dial much for those who agree it, for those who oppose it, its a significant vote loser. Public First reports that:
Increased investment in renewable sources and new taxes on the largest polluters in a wider policy platform makes a party 14% more electable
Delaying net zero and continued oil and gas drilling in the North Sea in a wider policy platform makes a party 10% less electable
Voters have genuine questions (and in some cases concerns) about how specific green policies will impact their personal finances and day-to-day lives. These questions should be taken seriously by campaigners and politicians alike to build public support.
But as an electoral strategy, this research shows that reducing net zero ambition, backing away from green investment, and failing to hasten the transition away from fossil fuels are vote losers, rather than winners.
In a survey of 20,000 people, and using the MRP method which allows conclusions to be drawn about specific political constituencies, Greenpeace found that of those who had an opinion, more than two thirds (70%) stated that climate and environment policies are important and will influence how they vote in the next election. For voters in Blue Wall seats, the study found:
more than four in five of constituents who had an opinion want the government to provide more financial support to insulate homes and 73% want more government funding for heat pumps. They also want to see more government investment for renewable power (88%) and subsidised rail travel to ensure it is always cheaper than driving (79%).
Voters in all of More in Common’s Britain’s Choice segments (including the more socially conservative segments) are more likely to say the Government is doing too little, rather than not enough, according to polling by in August 2023.
Whilst delays to some near-term net zero policies are being considered by the government following the unexpected ‘hold’ by the Conservatives in the Uxbridge by-election in July (where opposition to the expansion of the ULEZ scheme was assumed to have played a role), this data from More in Common underscores the limited political capital to be made from rowing back on net zero.
In response to the government announcing changes to Net Zero policies (around the phasing out of petrol and diesel cars, and gas boilers), a survey asked people to select the words they would use to describe the government pushing back or scrapping key climate policies.
The most commonly selected word was “untrustworthy” (40%) – followed by “sensible” (29%) and chaotic (25%). Respondents said they’d describe Rishi Sunak as “reckless” (33%), “backwards” (31%), and “sensible (29%) if he were to push back these policies.
Whilst these findings suggest there’s no straightforward political capital in watering down Net Zero goals, the percentage of people selecting ‘sensible’ to both questions is also important. For some members of the public – concentrated among Conservative voters – there’s a sense of pragmatism in delaying Net Zero targets.
Wider research suggests, though, that the reason for this is important to take into account. Voters are not sceptical of green policies, but people don’t believe the government has a credible plan, that the infrastructure is ready, or that changes are currently being made affordable enough to undertake.
These are all issues that a bolder, fairer offer to voters on Net Zero could address.
Based on a set of interviews with 15 MPs, and a focus group with civil society representatives, new research – based on the findings of a collaboration between the Climate Citizens research group at Lancaster University, The Climate Coalition and the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations, and supported by Green Alliance – shows how the climate opinions of MPs have changed since 2018 when a previous round of research was carried out. The report states that:
MPs are now much more concerned about climate; for them, it’s become a mainstream issue, but they have specific concerns that were not so evident before, particularly around how to manage the complex process of change.
All the MPs interviewed stressed the importance of protecting people from potential negative impacts, such as higher costs or job losses in high carbon industries. They also fear a political backlash if climate action is seen as unfair.
The report shows how the political agenda has shifted over five years, from the need to ‘do something’ to the pace of change.
The mainstreaming of climate change in the political discourse over the past five years is important to recognise. But significant challenges remain in closing the gap between the political and the social mandate, with Climate Barometer tracker data showing that MPs continue to underestimate the salience of the environment among voters, to misjudge support for onshore wind, and to underestimate support for Net Zero (which outweighs opposition across society).
ACT Climate Labs have released a guide to rebutting the argument that there’s ‘no point’ in the UK reducing its emissions, when countries like China or India account for a higher proportion of global CO2.
Although this argument is prevalent among opponents of climate action, encouragingly Climate Barometer tracker data shows that only a minority of the public and MPs endorse it. Much larger numbers agree that the UK should be one of the most ambitious countries in the world on climate change regardless of what other countries are doing.
In its June 2023 progress report to parliament, the Climate Change Committee outlined how the UK government could regain a sense of leadership on climate change:
Stay firm on existing commitments and move to delivery. The Government has made a number of strong commitments, these must be restated and moved as swiftly as possible towards delivery.
Retake a clear leadership role internationally. The UK will need to regain its international climate leadership
Empower and inform households and communities to make low-carbon choices. Despite some positive steps to provide households with advice on reducing energy use in the last year, a coherent public engagement strategy on climate action is long overdue.
The Labour Climate & Environment Forum tested video clips of senior Labour figures, including Kier Starmer, talking about climate change. In findings that suggest there is space/an opportunity for a much clearer and bolder offer to voters on climate change, the authors report that:
Of people who saw Keir Starmer talking about climate, 53% said they intended to vote Labour compared to 47% who saw Starmer talking about a different issue and 45% who saw no video at all. Those who saw Starmer talking on climate were more likely to think that Labour is the best party on the economy by an increase in five and twelve percentage points compared with the no-climate video and no video respectively.
According to polling by Omnisis, less than a quarter of the UK public (24%) think Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is showing leadership on climate change, in the context of hesitation around attendance at COP27.
This stands in contrast with the desire held by most Britons for the UK to show climate leadership and be one of the most ambitious countries in the world on climate change.
The same survey found broad support for the government funding climate action in less wealthy nations overseas.
When asked “Does the UK have a responsibility to fund climate action in poorer nations now suffering from climate-related extreme weather disasters?”, 49% said yes, while 31% said no. 29% say they did not know.
This aligns with data from our Climate Barometer tracker, which shows high levels of support for wealthy nations providing compensation to poorer countries for damages caused by the climate crisis.
Understanding perceptions of political leadership on climate change
There isn’t much trust or pride in political leaders, but the public expects political leadership on climate change nonetheless.