In a dramatic turn of events, the government faces yet another legal showdown concerning its climate strategy. A High Court judge has mandated a Judicial Review of the UK's official blueprint, which aims to fortify the nation's resilience against the mounting impacts of climate change.
Scheduled for June 18th and 19th, the 'rolled up' hearing will scrutinize challenges challenging the legality and efficacy of the government's latest iteration of the National Adaptation Plan.
This legal skirmish stems from the relentless efforts of the environmental group Friends of the Earth alongside individuals profoundly affected by the climate crisis. Among them, Kevin Jordan, tragically rendered homeless by coastal erosion, and disability activist Doug Paulley, grappling with health challenges exacerbated by soaring temperatures.
Critics contend that the current National Adaptation Plan, mandated for update every five years under the Climate Change Act, falls woefully short of its intended purpose and urgently requires augmentation.
The Climate Change Committee's recent scathing assessment further fueled the discontent, lambasting the plan as inadequately equipped to shield critical infrastructure and vital sectors of the economy from the escalating climate risks.
Justice Sheldon confirmed that the Judicial Review should proceed, saying that "the issues raised by the Claimants are of considerable public importance."
The government was considering a request for comment when going to press.
But speaking following the CCC's highly critical report last month, a spokesperson said: "The government's third National Adaptation Programme sets out a robust five-year plan to strengthen infrastructure, promote a greener economy, and safeguard food production in the face of the climate challenges we face. We are investing billions in projects to improve the UK's climate resilience, including £5.2bn in flood and coastal schemes in England, safeguarding future water supplies by accelerating £2.2bn of investment through our ambitious Plan for Water, and driving tree planting and peat restoration through the £750m Nature for Climate Fund."
However, Friends of the Earth campaigner Alison Dilworth said the government had a case to answer regarding its climate resilience efforts.
"The government's adaptation programme - which should be a plan to protect us all from the accelerating impacts of the climate crisis - is completely inadequate and puts people's lives at risk," she said. "We know the most marginalised communities, including disabled people, are most at risk and largely excluded from planning and preparedness work. We hope our legal challenge will lead to a robust new plan that helps safeguard people, property, and infrastructure from the consequences of a rapidly warming planet."
Jordan said the UK remained "completely under-prepared for the impacts of climate change and the threat it poses to the homes, lives, and livelihoods of thousands of people across the country."
"When I bought my house 14 years ago, I was told it would be safe for about another 100 years—it wasn't," he said. I may have lost my home to climate change, but the fight goes on. I hope this legal challenge forces the government to draw up more ambitious and effective climate adaptation plans that better protect us all."
Paulley said the government had a responsibility to "recognise that disabled communities are disproportionately affected and often have additional support needs when a crisis hits". "Many people like me who lived in a care home during the Covid pandemic will have experienced the fear and helplessness of feeling abandoned in a crisis," he said. "We mustn't let this happen with climate change."
Amidst the legal tumult, voices like Jordan's resonate, echoing the sentiment that the UK remains ill-prepared for the intensifying impacts of climate change.
Paulley, emphasizing the disproportionate impact on disabled communities, underscores the imperative for tailored support in times of crisis.
This legal battle represents just one facet of a broader challenge to the government's climate strategy amid mounting legal scrutiny and societal pressure for meaningful action.
As the world grapples with the urgent imperative of climate resilience, this legal standoff underscores the pivotal role of the judiciary in holding governments to account for their climate commitments.
Writing on social media platform X, Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary Claire Coutinho said she was "concerned by the Strasbourg Court decision".
She said, "How we tackle climate change affects our economic, energy, and national security. "Elected politicians are best placed to make those decisions."