UK is polluter but we cannot afford climate reparations, says Johnson
We simply do not have the financial resources but we can help fix problem, he tells Sharm el-sheikh event
THE UK cannot afford to pay climate reparations to poorer countries despite polluting since the Industrial Revolution, Boris Johnson has said.
The former prime minister made the comments at the Cop27 summit in Egypt, where the issue of climate funds is set to dominate negotiations.
Poorer countries say the loss and damage they are already experiencing as a result of climate change should be paid for by rich nations who have historically polluted the most.
The UK backed a move to get the issue on the official agenda for the twoweek talks for the first time after a growing campaign from countries such as Pakistan, a third of which was left under water by floods this summer.
Grant Shapps, the Business Secretary, told LBC yesterday that it was “fair comment” to ask if the UK should pay out to climate vulnerable nations.
“We industrialised first and without knowing about releasing carbon from fossil fuels, [we] of course contributed towards it. I think that’s fair comment,” he said.
But Mr Johnson said simple payouts would not be possible, despite the UK bearing some blame for climate change.
“The United Kingdom was one of, if not the first, industrialised nation.
“The first wisps of carbon came out of the factories and mills and foundries of the West Midlands 200 years ago. We started it all,” he told a New York Times event in Sharm el-sheikh.
“There’s no question that per capita, the people of the UK have put a lot of carbon into the atmosphere.
“What we cannot do is make up for that in some kind of reparations. We simply do not have the financial resources. No country could. What we can do is help with the technology that can help to fix the problem.”
The UK has kept relatively quiet on the issue of loss and damage in recent years while it held the Cop presidency. But having handed over the reins to Egypt, it will now come under pressure to set out its position on the funding.
The talks do not have to reach a final agreement on the funding, with a deadline set for 2024.
Developed countries are pushing for an agreement that commits minimal cash, but use their expertise or financial backing towards investment and the development of green technology.
Sara Jane Ahmed, an adviser to the Vulnerable Group of Twenty (V20), said the UK had a moral responsibility to help. “British peoples’ emissions have contributed to what’s happening, to the damages that are being felt,” she said.
“So it’s as if you’ve polluted a water stream, and the person down the stream is drinking this poisoned water. And they’re asking you to please stop poisoning the water. This has been happening since the Industrial Revolution.”
Climate-vulnerable countries estimate the economic hit from climate change could reach $1trillion by 2050.
Mohamed Nasheed, the former president of the Maldives, said Mr Johnson was wrong to say UK has historic responsibility.
“You did not invent the internal combustion engine to murder me. You thought this was going to give you prosperity and a better life,” he said.
“I would not speak about loss and damage in anti-colonial, anti-slavery language, which Boris Johnson did.”
Mr Nasheed said developed countries were unlikely to hand out cash, but argued that investments could be made to help vulnerable nations respond to climate change.
Antonio Guterres, the UN secretarygeneral, told world leaders at the Cop27 summit that “loss and damage can no longer be swept under the rug. It is a moral imperative”.
Negotiators will now discuss the issue of financing loss and damage, with
‘There’s no question that per capita, the UK has put a lot of carbon into the atmosphere’
an agreement expected by the end of the summit on how to move forward.
Developed nations including the UK are expected to argue that they can make amends for the impacts of climate change by helping fund initiatives to help them decarbonise.
But the so-called vulnerable nations want to see extra cash pledged to help rebuild after natural disasters such as the floods that devastated Pakistan this summer.
Committing funds from the UK could be politically sensitive if it comes as households struggle with their finances.
At an event yesterday, Mia Mottley, the Barbados prime minister, said it was “fundamentally unfair” that her country should have to pay for the impact of historic climate change.
“We were the ones whose blood, sweat and tears financed the industrial revolution,” she said. “Are we now to face double jeopardy, by having us now pay the cost as well as a result of the stock that has been generated of greenhouse gases from the industrial revolution. That is fundamentally unfair.”
Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish First Minister, said rich countries had an obligation to poorer nations suffering the impacts of climate change. Scotland is one of few nations to have committed dedicated funds to loss and damage.
“I think this Cop is an opportunity for the global north and the global south to come together and have a proper, grown-up conversation about how we make progress,” she said.
“We’ve got to mitigate climate change, we’ve got to help countries adapt to the impacts of climate change, but as we’ve seen over the past year, not least in Pakistan, there are many parts of the world that are suffering loss and damage now that is irreversible and can’t be mitigated against.”
Rishi Sunak said yesterday that delivering on climate finance to help countries adapt or mitigate the impacts was “the right thing to do”, but declined to address the issue of reparations.
Boris Johnson was back in the political spotlight yesterday, attending the Cop27 climate change conference in Egypt as one of the more zealous proponents of net-zero carbon emissions. The former prime minister was once sceptical about such ambitions and was even an enthusiastic champion of shale gas just 10 years ago. In a column for this newspaper in 2012, he said: “Ignore the doom merchants – Britain should get fracking. It’s green, cheap and plentiful.”
Now, Mr Johnson has emerged as one of the world’s foremost campaigners for faster action to reduce carbon emissions. At a meeting on the fringes of the summit in Sharm el-sheikh, he criticised “net-zero naysayers” who want to “frack the hell out of the British countryside”.
Of course, people can change their minds, but he was right the first time: shale is plentiful in the country and would help meet carbon reduction targets, reduce bills and underpin energy security. Yet he came to office in 2019 pledged to a moratorium on fracking and even though, during Liz Truss’s brief time in No10, it looked as if the ban would be lifted, it has been reaffirmed by Rishi Sunak.
The renewable energy timetable first set out by Theresa May and confirmed by Mr Johnson is now accepted by the current Government and by the Opposition. No alternative is brooked. By 2050, the UK is to reduce its carbon emissions to net zero, with some bans – such as those on sales of new petrol and diesel cars – taking effect just seven years hence.
In Egypt, he said other countries needed to follow Britain’s example but they show no sign of doing so. Instead, some countries want the West to stump up billions of pounds in “reparations” for the damage caused by past pollution. At least here, Mr Johnson drew the line, saying such payments were unaffordable. But this issue is set to dominate the debate at Cop27, with Mr Sunak among the Western leaders facing calls to acknowledge the debt to be paid by early industrialised nations.
The Americans have come up with an alternative scheme whereby carbon credits could be sold to businesses, with the proceeds then funding clean energy programmes in the developing world. This is a market-based approach that has the potential to unlock billions of pounds in private capital to help meet emissions targets. Seeking reparations, as Robert Tombs argues on these pages, is the wrong approach.