With the UK Prime Minister fighting for survival on all fronts, Jim McClelland asks: What do times of such economic volatility and political upheaval teach us about sustainability?
Try as they might, commentators struggle to escape the old adage that a week is a long time in politics – and the last seven days in the UK have illustrated that point to a tee.
For the Government, the trouble all started with the disastrous results in the local elections, and escalated from there.
The UK now broadly ranks second in the world for climate change adaptation technologies
Jim McClelland Sustainable futurist, editor, journalist and speaker
Beginning of the end?
On Thursday May 7, elections were held in some 136 local authorities – at borough, district, county and metropolitan levels – with votes included for certain mayoral posts. On the same day, the Scottish Parliament and Senedd Cymru in Wales also went to the polls.
Although a mid-term protest vote was expected, the sheer scale of defeat in these local election results proved catastrophic for the ruling Labour Party. It set alarm bells ringing in Westminster and put the skids under the current Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
Labour suffered an historic defeat in Wales, coming third in its worst result on record and losing control over the Senedd for the first time ever. It dropped more seats in Scotland, narrowly managing to hold onto a tie for second place, its influence weakened further.
Routed in England, the Labour Party lost a whopping 1,496 seats out of a total of 2,196 up for election. To say it was a bad night overall for Starmer would be an understatement.
This ballot-box debacle, however, proved only the beginning of a series of events unfolding in quick succession as part of what the media soon dubbed the ‘Starmer Drama’…
Exits and plot twists
Firstly, as soon as May 9, a stalking-horse candidate emerged in the shape of Labour MP Catherine West, who talked of launching a leadership challenge to Starmer.
In a bid to subdue any post-election uprising and shore up his ailing premiership, Starmer then announced a major reset speech to be delivered on Tuesday May 12.
Long on rhetoric, but short on any real vision or policy shift, Starmer’s fine words failed to stem the rising tide of disapproval. Politicians, like voters, were losing confidence in him.
So, on that same day, no fewer than four junior Government Ministers resigned, citing a need for bold change. They included the relatively high-profile figure of Jess Philips MP.
In a damaging resignation letter, Phillips argued that “deeds, not words are what matter”.
All of which infighting set an ironic scene for the pomp and circumstance of the King’s Speech, which marked the formal reopening of Parliament on the Wednesday.
No surprises King’s Speech
Traditionally, the King’s Speech has ranked alongside the Chancellor’s Budget and Autumn Statement as a major policy milestone. Nowadays, though, there is an argument that none of these showpiece orations is really a manifesto-driven political vision statement anymore. Instead, they are essentially selling documents, glorified pitch decks.
On this occasion, the address barely made the news: partly because of noises off-stage, but chiefly because the Speech itself was a litany of little change and no surprises.
Yes, there was money for the railways and a (re)nationalisation plan for British Steel; plus, legislation to clean-up the water industry; also, a Remediation Bill to tackle homes with unsafe cladding, alongside long-term support for social housing and leasehold reform.
Even in terms of investment, though, many of the proposals read less like economics, more like sales and finance – and the resulting deal-making looks a lot like horse-trading.
The UK is not alone in this, of course – arguably, President Trump in his role as US Sales Rep in Chief sets the tone for much of this short-termism and transactional approach.
Overall, none of this rang a bell for a radical agenda. In amongst all the minor and incremental steps, though, there were one or two moves that merit closer attention.
Europe and energy security
Firstly, there was the push to strengthen ties with the European Union (EU) in the form of the European Partnership Bill. There is no quick fix for Brexit, but it is interesting to ponder what the likely trade-offs might be in terms of policy drivers, standards and regulation.
Whilst the United Kingdom is clearly keen to access EU markets, it is also worth bearing in mind that the UK is the world’s 5th largest economy by GDP, ahead of India and France, not far behind Japan. The latest Q1 figures for UK GDP also beat estimates to the upside.
Secondly, in what King Charles described as “an increasingly dangerous and volatile world”, the clean-tech focus on energy security also stood out. Closure of the Strait of Hormuz has exposed vulnerability in any economy beholden to fossil-fuel imports. The Energy Independence Bill is touted as the solution to the scale-up of homegrown renewables.
At the precise moment of this midweek announcement, even hard-nosed decarbonisation and clean tech advocates might have felt mildly encouraged, especially given that the UK now broadly ranks second in the world for climate change adaptation technologies.
Thursday morning, however, Health Secretary Wes Streeting MP, a prime candidate for leadership of the Labour Party, tendered his resignation. That same day, it was made public that Angela Rayner MP, former Deputy Leader and another short-odds runner in the race for No 10, had cleared the personal tax hurdle that forced her off the field last year.
As if all this was not enough, MP for Makerfield Josh Simons also declared he will step down in favour of popular Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham, thereby bringing about a local by-election in his seat in the Northwest of England.
To contest the Party leadership, Burnham must first get himself elected an MP. With Simons falling on his sword, Streeting, Rayner and Burnham are all under starter’s orders.
So, where does this ruling-party implosion leave the sustainability agenda, its champions and the wider community? And what lessons can be learned in other countries?
Sustainability, strategy and AI
Well, resisting the temptation to greenwash and greenhush, it is essential to play the long game.
Thinking more strategically about sustainable business and development helps ride out periods of casino-economy volatility and political upheaval. That does not mean we should ignore trends in innovation, though, especially in tech and artificial intelligence (AI).
Resilience-building is no Luddite agenda – it is proactive futureproofing. So, the potential benefits of AI must be harnessed to our advantage, not denied out of ignorance and fear.
To plan and perform well over the longer term, decision-makers will need more and better data underpinning their models and forecasts, spreadsheets and analysis – AI can help.
Over time, efficiencies exert a multiplier effect on savings; plus, preventative measures and diagnostics preserve asset values and safeguard production, too – again AI can help.
AI can also help crunch numbers for returns on investment, write bids faster and submit more grant applications. AI is only one of a number of tools, but a resource-friendly option when personnel are at a premium, and project budgets seem stretched to breaking point.
In all of this, the challenge is to maintain a creative but pragmatic sustainability mindset, and to do so in the midst of a maelstrom.
It would be naïve to suggest this is easy; but it is doable; and doing is what matters – as Sir Keir Starmer is about to find out, the hard way.
Jim McClelland is a sustainable futurist, editor, journalist and speaker
