Political Analysis & Western Democratic Trends - December 2025

Executive Summary

The global discourse on climate change has reached a critical inflection point. While the physical climate crisis accelerates with temperatures tracking toward 2.3-2.5°C warming by century’s end, public concern in developed nations is declining—not because people doubt climate change, but because they cannot afford the transition costs being imposed upon them.

This document captures a comprehensive analysis of current climate policy positions across the UK political spectrum and broader Western democratic movements, examining the fundamental tension between environmental necessity and economic affordability.

The Reality: Not ‘Cooling Off,’ But Complexity

What’s Actually Declining

US polling data reveals significant shifts in public sentiment:

Belief that Earth is warming dropped from 83% (2020) to 75% (2024)

Young people (18-34) saw particularly sharp declines - 17 percentage points drop in concern since 2021

Weekly exposure to climate news fell from 55% (2023) to 47% (2025) across eight countries surveyed

What Remains Strong

Despite these declines, global commitment to action remains substantial:

89% of people worldwide want more climate action

69% willing to contribute 1% of income toward climate action

56% globally think about climate change daily or weekly

The Physical Reality Intensifies

While public attention fluctuates, the crisis accelerates:

Global temperatures projected to rise 2.3-2.5°C by century’s end under current pledges

1.5°C threshold will likely be exceeded within the next decade

Observed warming for 2015-2024 reached 1.24°C above pre-industrial levels

Human activities are increasing Earth’s energy imbalance and driving faster sea-level rise

The Affordability Crisis: Real and Significant

Energy Bills Hit Households Hard

The cost burden on ordinary citizens has become unsustainable:

New York: Electricity prices rose 36% between 2019-2024, with further increases expected

UK: Energy bills surged following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and remain high

UK electricity bills remain among the highest in Europe for both domestic and business users

UK households with heat pumps pay approximately £490 per year in policy costs above underlying electricity costs

Political Consequences

Political strategists have identified a fundamental shift: “Climate is out, affordability is in.” When electricity supplies were ample, there was less need to focus on affordability. Now those are the public’s key concerns, and climate advocates face severe pushback.

The Complexity: What’s Actually Causing High Bills?

Contrary to simplified narratives, the primary driver of high energy bills has been gas prices, particularly following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Government policy costs for renewables are actually 20 times higher than for gas in the UK, but reforming these schemes could save households with gas boilers £190 and heat pump households £490 annually.

The structural problem lies in how the transition has been implemented: reliable power sources are being phased out faster than replacements come online, while state mandates artificially drive up electricity demand through forced electrification. This creates a perverse situation where switching to more efficient technology actually costs households more in the short term.

UK Political Landscape: Five Competing Visions

Labour (Government): Pragmatic Green Ambition

**Core Position: **Climate action is compatible with economic growth, energy security and lower bills. Net zero by 2050, clean power by 2030.

Key Policies:

Great British Energy - state-owned clean energy company with £8.3bn capitalisation

Double onshore wind, triple solar, quadruple offshore wind by 2030

No new oil and gas licences, but maintain existing production

Cutting household bills by £134/year by moving renewable subsidies from bills to general taxation

£6.6bn Warmer Homes initiative for energy efficiency improvements

**Political Reality: **In government actually facing the political consequences of high energy bills. Attempting to balance environmental ambition with immediate affordability concerns.

Conservatives: Shifting Toward Climate Scepticism

**Dramatic Trajectory Shift: **Under Kemi Badenoch’s leadership, the Conservatives have moved sharply rightward on climate policy, directly copying Reform UK positions.

Current Positions:

Pledged to repeal the Climate Change Act (announced October 2025)

Publicly shunned the UK’s 2050 net zero target (February 2025) - called it “impossible”

Remove carbon taxes on energy bills

Scrap wind farm subsidies

Promise no new “green levies”

Maximise North Sea oil and gas extraction

Reduce green levies on energy bills using a 2023 baseline (these levies account for 11% of typical dual-fuel bills)

**Leadership Influence: **Badenoch accepted donations from Neil Record (chair of Net Zero Watch climate denial group) and a Chevron director. She hired advisors with a history of attacking net zero.

**Assessment: **The Conservatives have abandoned their previous climate leadership. Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho’s positions now mirror Reform’s 2024 manifesto almost exactly. This represents a fundamental break from the party that introduced the Climate Change Act in 2008 and legislated net zero by 2050 in 2019.

Reform UK: Full Climate Denial

**Core Belief: **Climate change is not a problem and is not caused by humans. Nigel Farage repeatedly blames climate change on “sunspot activity” and “underwater volcanoes.”

**Manifesto Headline: **“Net Zero is crippling our economy”

Key Policies:

Scrap net zero target entirely

Scrap £10bn in renewable energy subsidies

Introduce windfall tax on wind and solar companies

Fast-track North Sea oil and gas licences

Grant shale gas licences (fracking)

Remove VAT on energy bills

Lower fuel duty by 20p per litre

Scrap ban on new internal combustion engine vehicles

**Economic Analysis: **Independent studies show Reform’s policies would:

Cost over 60,000 jobs

Wipe £92 billion off the UK economy

Could actually raise household energy bills rather than lower them

**Funding Sources: **92% of Reform’s donations between 2019-2024 general elections came from climate science deniers, fossil fuel interests, or major polluters—totalling £2.3 million.

**Political Reality: **Despite economic evidence against their position, Reform has won 677 council seats (from none) and is successfully pulling the Conservatives rightward on climate policy. Their message resonates with voters angry about energy costs.

Liberal Democrats: Ambitious But Affordable?

**Core Position: **Net zero by 2045 (five years ahead of current target). The transition must be affordable, equitable, and create opportunities.

Key Targets:

90% of electricity from renewables by 2030

Meet Paris Agreement commitment: 68% emissions reduction by 2030

Remove Conservative restrictions on solar and wind power

Affordability Measures:

Social energy tariff for low-income households

Free home energy upgrades for low-income households

Decouple electricity prices from wholesale gas prices

Eliminate regional differences in energy bills

One-off windfall tax on oil and gas profits

Additional Commitments:

National Climate Assembly for citizen participation

UK-EU Energy and Climate Security Pact

Maintain fracking ban, introduce coal mine ban

**Feasibility Assessment: **The 90% renewables by 2030 target (five years away) would require roughly doubling current renewable capacity. Given grid infrastructure takes years to build and planning permissions are notoriously slow, this appears extremely optimistic. The UK currently gets 40-50% from renewables. Even with aggressive action, infrastructure requirements alone make this timeline questionable.

Green Party: Maximum Ambition, Wealth Tax Funding

**Score: **39 out of 40 points in environmental assessments—far ahead of all other parties.

**Core Position: **Net zero by 2040 at the latest (a decade ahead of current targets). “As fast as is feasibly possible.”

Financial Commitment:

£40 billion per year for transition to green economy

Funding through wealth taxes—”those with broadest shoulders will pay their fair share”

Renewable Targets:

80 GW offshore wind by 2035

53 GW onshore wind by 2035

100 GW solar by 2035

70% of UK electricity from wind by 2030

Home Efficiency:

£29 billion over five years for home insulation

£9 billion over five years for low-carbon heating systems (heat pumps)

£4 billion over five years to insulate other buildings

Additional Positions:

Cancel recent fossil fuel licences including Rosebank

End all new fossil fuel extraction projects

Remove all oil and gas subsidies

Carbon tax on fossil fuel imports and domestic extraction

Phase out nuclear power entirely (considered “unsafe and much more expensive than renewables”)

**The Wealth Tax Assumption: **The Green Party’s entire financial model rests on the assumption that wealth taxes can fund £40 billion annually without capital flight, asset relocation, or economic damage. This assumes: (1) the wealthy won’t move assets/residence, (2) there’s sufficient wealth to tax at that level indefinitely, (3) the public will accept this redistribution during a cost-of-living crisis, and (4) it won’t damage economic competitiveness. Most wealth is mobile, and countries compete for it. This represents a significant vulnerability in their otherwise comprehensive plan.

Are They Aligned With Public Opinion?

The data reveals a fundamental disconnect between what parties propose and what the public can tolerate:

The Public Want Action BUT Worry About Costs

89% of global population want more climate action

69% would give 1% of their income to climate action

However, declining belief that individuals have responsibility to act

Affordability Crisis Dominates

Political strategists confirm: “Climate is out, affordability is in.” Reliability and affordability are now the public’s key concerns, and climate advocates face severe pushback. This isn’t climate denial—it’s people struggling with genuine cost-of-living pressures.

Global Western Democratic Trends: The Conservative/Populist Shift

The UK political dynamics are not isolated. Across Western democracies, a remarkably consistent pattern has emerged.

The European Parliament Elections (2024): A Watershed Moment

Green parties fell from 71 to 52 seats

Far-right parties achieved highest-ever vote share: 27% (191 seats out of 720)

Conservative parties made substantial gains

This shift has created new challenges for advancing ambitious climate legislation

Public Opinion Shift: The Economic Reality

Between 2019 and 2024, European public opinion showed a clear movement toward more concern about economic costs of climate policies. The proportion prioritising economy over climate mitigation doubled. Climate policy sceptics became twice as likely to vote for Eurosceptic parties.

In 2019, support for prioritising environmental protection over economic growth was a majority position among European voters. By 2024, a substantial shift had occurred toward concern about economic costs.

The “Greenlash” Phenomenon

The “greenlash”—pushback against the European Green Deal—has become tightly entwined with the continent’s far-right surge. Indeed, greenlash and the far right have become mutually reinforcing, each playing a major role in driving the other.

Concrete Policy Retreats:

Following widespread farmers’ protests in France, Spain, Poland, Italy and Belgium, the European Commission backtracked on several green programmes

February 2024: Commission withdrew its proposal on sustainable use of pesticides

Weakened environmental standards within the Common Agricultural Policy

February 2025: Omnibus law rolled back various sustainability-related requirements for businesses

Country-by-Country Analysis

Far-Right Electoral Success:

Far-right parties topped polls in Europe’s four most populous countries: Germany, France, Italy and UK

In office or supporting government in seven countries: Belgium, Croatia, Finland, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia and Sweden

Significant impact on politics in eight more countries

Germany:

Right-wing populists emerged as strongest party in Germany’s East. The government was forced to critically examine its ill-designed heating law as an example of how not to do climate action. The leaders of the Greens and Chancellor Scholz’s SPD conceded the government had to take a critical look at itself.

France:

Yellow Vests protests grew from opposition to carbon taxes on fuel, expressing broader economic concerns about cost of living and French state policies.

Netherlands:

Far-right PVV made major gains opposing climate policies, joining the Patriots for Europe coalition.

Multiple Countries:

Poland, Spain, Italy, and Belgium all saw major farmer protests against green regulations, leading to policy retreats at EU level.

The Activist Gap

Environmental activists lament that fissures between the grassroots pro-climate movement and green parties are deepening. As green parties have made uncomfortable compromises over the years, a gap has widened between pro-environment political leaders and their environmentalist base.

In stark contrast, among climate skeptics, unity has tightened. The nexus between civic and political spheres now functions more effectively on the anti-climate than the pro-climate side of EU policy debates.

Which UK Model Aligns With Western Movements?

**Answer: **The Conservative/Reform trajectory is winning across the West.

The Winning Political Formula

The centre-right European People’s Party is “clearly committed” to existing 2030 and 2050 targets but doesn’t mention the 2040 ambition. Meanwhile, the right-wing ECR wants to “prioritise implementation of existing requirements before considering new regulations” and review “problematic objectives.”

This matches the UK Conservative trajectory:

Keep distant net zero targets

Emphasise “pragmatism”

Cut immediate costs (green levies)

Slow down implementation

Prioritise affordability over speed

The Political Momentum

Moving AWAY FROM:

Green Party ambition and wealth redistribution schemes

Liberal Democrat-style aggressive targets with vague funding mechanisms

Rapid implementation timelines

Moving TOWARD:

Conservative “pragmatic” slowdown (current sweet spot)

Reform-style climate scepticism (gaining ground, especially in Eastern Europe, Italy, Netherlands)

Critical Insights and Conclusions

The Fundamental Tension

Both things are simultaneously true: climate change poses real risks AND the way we’ve structured the response has created real financial hardship for many households. The climate transition has been implemented in ways that hit ordinary people’s wallets hard, particularly when:

Policy costs are loaded onto electricity bills rather than general taxation

The transition happens faster than infrastructure can support

People are mandated to switch to technologies that cost more upfront

Benefits are long-term while pain is immediate

The Perception Inertia Problem

What’s “cooling off” isn’t the planet or the scientific urgency—it’s primarily media attention and a sense of crisis fatigue in some populations, particularly in wealthier nations where other immediate concerns compete for attention. Meanwhile, competing crises like economic instability and political tensions dominate public attention.

Why Green and Liberal Democrat Positions Struggle

**Green Party Weakness: **The wealth tax funding model assumes the wealthy won’t relocate assets or themselves, that public support exists for major wealth redistribution during a cost-of-living crisis, and that it won’t damage competitiveness. These are heroic assumptions in an era of capital mobility.

**Liberal Democrat Weakness: **The 90% renewables by 2030 target would require doubling current capacity in five years. Given that grid infrastructure takes years to build, planning permissions are slow, and supply chains are already stretched, this timeline appears unrealistic even with maximum political will.

The Geopolitical Shift

There are doubts whether the EU will manage to reconcile its ambitious sustainability goals with renewed priorities now more focused on competitiveness and security. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and rising global tensions mean sustainability investments are likely to become less relevant as defence and security take priority in a Europe increasingly directed toward a “hard power” stance.

The Democratic Deficit

Polls show many European citizens feel left out of the decisionmaking process and concerned they have little chance to influence policies. There is a correlation between climate skepticism and political disaffection. A 2025 OECD report concluded that citizen trust in the green transition is still lacking, with only a minority believing their governments will make progress on reducing carbon emissions.

Final Assessment

The pattern is unmistakable across Western democracies: when people face immediate economic hardship, long-term environmental goals lose political viability—regardless of their scientific validity.

The Conservatives’ “pragmatic delay” approach represents the current political sweet spot across most of Europe, offering a middle path between Green/Liberal Democrat ambition and Reform’s outright rejection. However, momentum continues shifting rightward, with Reform’s full-rejection approach gaining ground particularly in regions experiencing the greatest economic stress.

This is not a victory for climate denialism per se—it’s a political reaction to policies that have prioritised long-term environmental goals over short-term household affordability. The challenge for climate advocates is not convincing people climate change is real, but demonstrating that the transition can be managed without destroying household budgets in the process.

Until this fundamental affordability crisis is addressed, expect continued political drift toward positions that prioritise immediate economic relief over climate ambition, regardless of what the science demands.

— End of Analysis —

December 2025

No posts