The debate on net zero continues to simmer just below the surface of UK political discourse, touching on many major themes but rarely dominating.
With implications for how the UK charts its path on economic growth, energy security, transport, food security, water security, responding to extreme weather, and responding to international crises, net zero policy remains crucial to the debate on the future of UK policymaking.
Yet, when the Government confirmed it would accept the Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) advice for Carbon Budget 7 (CB7) – the legally binding emissions target for the period 2038 – 2042 – there was remarkably little fanfare or media coverage, with no major news outlets carrying the story.
The target – first published as advice by the CCC in February 2025 and formally endorsed by the Government on 2 June 2026 – will set the UK’s legally binding greenhouse gas emissions cap over the five-year period 2038 to 2042 at 535 MtCO2e, equivalent to an 87 percent decrease in emissions compared with a 1990 baseline.
The title of the press release announcing the Government’s endorsement of the target did not even acknowledge there was a target being set. Instead, it described an “energy security, jobs and investment boost”. This contrasts significantly with the 2021 Government announcement on the target for Carbon Budget 6 (CB6), which stated that the UK would enshrine a “new target in law to slash emissions by 78 percent”.
This difference in framing reflects the evolution of the net zero debate in the UK.
On the international stage, perhaps where discussions on climate change receive the most high-profile exposure, the period between the ratification of the Paris Agreement in 2016 and COP30 in 2025 was dominated by discussions around global temperature targets and climate justice.
These years were also interspersed with headlines on global temperature records, heated arguments on the obligations of developed countries to decarbonise rapidly and provide climate finance to developing countries, and a series of international crises that have led to high energy prices and economic disruption.
These events, and the prevailing narrative of stalled global progress on climate change, contributed to a belief in some political circles that pursuing net zero was a net cost, and that climate-compatible policy making was not an appropriate response to the challenges of the day.
Alongside the US withdrawals from the Paris Agreement – which put paid to the idea of a unified global effort to combat climate change – the years since 2016, in which net zero discourse and policy-making seemingly failed to address “bread and butter” political issues, have contributed to growing scepticisim, including in the UK, about the utility of pursuing net zero policy.
The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee has rightly identified that “vocal opposition to ‘net zero’ – including the energy transition – has grown in strength, political consensus has fractured and with it potentially the will to carry it through.” Reform UK – currently the highest polling UK political party – and the Conservative Party, which had previously been staunch in its commitment to the UK’s 2050 net zero target, have both disavowed the 2008 Climate Change Act and stated that they would seek to repeal or reform the UK’s net zero targets should they be elected.
Yet the Labour Government has held the course on net zero, and has refined its arguments for net zero in response to the challenges that have led many others to reject it.
As highlighted by the June 2026 ECIU and CBI research, which emphasised the growth and potential of the net zero economy in the UK, the Government’s argument is now unequivocally one which emphasises (among other things) the economic, investment, and cost-of-living benefits of pursuing net zero.
The Government has mainstreamed net zero policy in its wider economic and cost-of-living political offer, including getting “off the fossil fuel rollercoaster” to cushion the UK against future oil and gas (and therefore energy bill) spikes; investing public money in home and heating retrofits in order to deliver lower bills for households; and using public money through institutions such as the National Wealth Fund to de-risk and crowd-in investment in clean energy developments with the goal of creating jobs and building a domestic supply chains.
The mainstreaming of net zero considerations is evident in the Clean Power 2030 (CP2030) target, the retention of the zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) mandate, the Warm Homes Plan, the Critical Minerals Strategy refresh, and the proposals in the Energy Independence Bill and other energy-relevant legislation outlined in the 2026 King’s Speech.
Even the controversial suspension of new oil and gas licensing in the North Sea has been justified by the argument that there will be more jobs gained in the green economy through this policy than lost through the decline in oil and gas extraction.
So, while hardly a novel development in itself – the need to set carbon budgets on a five-yearly cycle is enshrined in law – the CB7 target announcement is still important for showing how the Government continues to perceive and justify its net zero and climate policy in the face of vocal opposition.
The Government is holding its course on net zero policy and has increasingly grounded the justifications for it in economic and cost-of-living terms, presenting net zero as a domestic economic enabler, rather than just a step towards combating a global challenge which should be addressed.
The Government’s confidence in this argument with the public and within the Labour Party is demonstrated by the “business as usual” CB7 announcement, despite the political fragmentation around the issue; including notable intra-party debate, as exposed by the release of the Mandelson files, which showed now-DWP Secretary Pat McFadden supporting the Tony Blair Institute’s 2025 critique of the Government’s net zero policies.
With the Government seemingly confident in the rationale for its continued commitment to net zero, and with the CB7 target announcement passing with little public debate, the Government must now set out a carbon budget delivery plan outlining the specific measures that will underpin the delivery of the target.
The CCC’s advice sets out recommendations and potential pathways for the Government to achieve this target. In making these choices, the CCC has recommended the Government set out “clear, timely decisions on support for new technology choices, and dates for phasing out old technology.”
In picking a pathway, the Government will need to prioritise some sectors and technologies. There will be political choices, and opportunities for sectors across the economy to engage with policymakers. While the Government has not deviated from the UK’s net zero target, the pathway to achieve it remains up for debate.