The waiting game

10th December 2012

Related Topics

Related tags

  • Central government ,
  • Energy ,
  • Generation ,
  • Mitigation



Following the publication of the Energy Bill and the chancellor's Autumn Statement, Paul Suff laments politicians' habit of passing the buck to future administrations when it comes to tough policy choices

Governments tend to put off taking difficult decisions. Procrastination is particularly common when those charged with finding a way forward are totally split on the best course of action. In the US, this situation is referred to as “kicking the can down the road”. In the UK, postponing a decision is described as “kicking it into the long grass”.

The procrastinators are either hoping the road is ever winding or the grass too long, allowing them defer indefinitely, or they’re waiting for someone else to take the decision – which, to apply another US idiom, is called “passing the buck”.

The absence from the Energy Bill of a decarbonisation target for the energy sector is a classic case of “kicking the can down the road” and, potentially, “passing the buck”. Rather than providing the certainty craved by investors in low-carbon generation by setting a target for 2030, the government has postponed the decision until 2016 – after the next general election.

The coalition – one half of which was keen to set a target – has justified the delay by saying a decision in 2016 will coincide with the setting of the fifth carbon budget, from 2028 to 2032. But that ignores the fact that the government has already placed a question mark against the “agreed” fourth budget, after the chancellor wrangled from his coalition partners an agreement to review the budget in 2014.

So, rather than create the right climate for investment, the Energy Bill has simply prolonged the uncertainty that already existed around energy policy. Do you put your money into developing renewable generating capacity, into cheaper-to-build gas-fired power plants or take your money elsewhere?

The answer will largely depend on who wins the 2015 general election. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have both signalled their intention to set a decarbonisation target, whereas the Conservatives – at least on current viewing – appear to favour a second dash-for-gas, which would render any target pointless and risk breaking the carbon budgets.

Of course, the outcome of the next general election, like energy policy, remains uncertain.


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

EU and UK citizens fear net-zero delivery deficit

Support for net zero remains high across the UK and the EU, but the majority of citizens don't believe that major emitters and governments will reach their climate targets in time.

16th May 2024

Read more

There is strong support for renewable energy as a source of economic growth among UK voters, particularly among those intending to switch their support for a political party.

16th May 2024

Read more

Taxing the extraction of fossil fuels in the world’s most advanced economies could raise $720bn (£575bn) by 2030 to support vulnerable countries facing climate damages, analysis has found.

2nd May 2024

Read more

The largest-ever research initiative of its kind has been launched this week to establish a benchmark for the private sector’s contribution to the UK’s 2050 net-zero target.

2nd May 2024

Read more

Weather-related damage to homes and businesses saw insurance claims hit a record high in the UK last year following a succession of storms.

18th April 2024

Read more

The Scottish government has today conceded that its goal to reduce carbon emissions by 75% by 2030 is now “out of reach” following analysis by the Climate Change Committee (CCC).

18th April 2024

Read more

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has issued a statement clarifying that no changes have been made to its stance on offsetting scope 3 emissions following a backlash.

16th April 2024

Read more

While there is no silver bullet for tackling climate change and social injustice, there is one controversial solution: the abolition of the super-rich. Chris Seekings explains more

4th April 2024

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close