Voters are serious about cutting emissions, but less so if the cost hurts

Net zero is the talk of the town. The fever pitch of pledges and protests at Cop26 in Glasgow represents the culmination of a decade in which climate change has gone from a niche interest to a top three priority for the British electorate.

But it’s one thing for ministers to make bold, long-term pledges and for voters to murmur support in principle. It is another for them to stomach the costs and disruption of decarbonising the economy.

A new study, published tomorrow by Onward, the think tank I am a director of, offers some answers.

The first is to underline that voters’ concern is real: people overwhelmingly think climate change is a threat, want the Government to be more ambitious, and believe that decarbonisation will create more jobs than it will destroy. There is no longer a political constituency for climate scepticism.

This is true for all voter groups, including Conservatives and voters in the Red Wall. In a focus group with undecided working-class voters in Redcar, people were impatient for this week’s negotiations in Glasgow: “We need a global commitment,” said John, an electrician, “we need a commitment from everyone at the same time, but they should start doing it now.”

Second, public support falls when people are confronted with the costs. Around seven in every 10 people want bolder action on climate change, but only half are willing to paying more in taxes or bills to cut emissions, and only 41 per cent of Conseravtive voters are happy to do so.

This antipathy varies considerably between different policies. Efforts to decarbonise transport, for example by using taxes to install electric vehicle chargers in every neighbourhood or taxing frequent flyers, retain strong support before and after costs are revealed. And people become more supportive of taxes on gas bills when presented with the fact that electricity bills will remain the same. But there’s less enthusiasm for cutting energy use in homes when presented with the bill. That represents 14 per cent of all UK emissions.

This is partly because these policies are the most expensive. We estimated that the cost of forcing every home to install insulation and double glazing would average at £8,000 per household, and offering a taxpayer subsidy to switch a gas boiler for a heat pump or hydrogen boiler would cost £50 a year extra in taxes. In this context, it is impressive that a a quarter and a third respectively still supported each policy fully costed.

But hesitance also stems from a simple fact: people dislike the state interfering in their homes. An Englishman’s home is his castle. This hint of nimbyism is exacerbated by the memories of being told to buy diesel cars and combi-boilers by the Blair government, only to be told to do something different today.

Whatever commitments ministers secure from other countries in Glasgow, there are still some hard yards to put in.