While we can only be glad to be rid of the likes of Owen Paterson due to this week’s cabinet reshuffle it is far too early to completely rejoice the change. Liz Truss has yet to prove herself any more capable for the job of environment secretary and her appointment reminds us how empty Cameron’s promise to be ‘the greenest government ever’ really was. An utter lack of respect for the environmental crisis is a fundamental part of not only Cameron’s government but is also built into the very structure of British politics.
Owen Paterson was infamous for his unsuitability for the job from the moment he was appointed. A climate change skeptic, Paterson’s time in charge was filled of controversial decisions but most famously his decision to cull British badgers. Just days before the reshuffle it was revealed he refused briefings on climate change from the Met Office. The complete close-mindedness of this politician was confirmed by similar instances of turning down scientific briefings to the extent of having never received one from his own department’s chief scientific advisor. Even after the chaotic weather of the past year (with terrible wet winters and already scorching summer) Paterson seems blind to the drastic measures needed.
Although Green party leader Natalie Bennett advocates celebrating Owen Paterson’s departure and not to “pre-judge” Liz Truss based on her previous work with oil baron Shell, the evidence has swiftly mounted to show that this reshuffle may in fact be a continuation of more of the same.
Along with the aforementioned, dubious, associations, Truss has also been in support of the third runway at Heathrow, is reportedly “scornful of the climate change agenda” and would rather promote agriculture than solar farms, having condemned renewable energy as “extremely expensive” and hence damaging to the economy. While this leaning towards agriculture is not entirely negative it is certain to mean the badger cull will be continued come the autumn so as to please farmers. If there was some uncertainty of where Truss’s affiliations lay her attendance at the Game Show reveals that the blinkers are on and a conservative, out-dated view of rural affairs is the only concern.
Of course, her Thatcherite politics are not too surprising but her immense advocacy for radical deregulation brings a bleak picture to the future of hydraulic fracturing in this country as we might soon see the fracking companies let loose, as their barely tightened red tape ties are cut.
I have a slight suspicion her strange political evolution might have some influence in her appointment. Being brought up in a left-wing family perhaps Cameron hopes she might have the power to suppress fracking protestors by being able to speak their language. I almost feel like Cameron’s support for her is influenced by an ability to gloat at both lefties and LibDems and say ‘Look we won one over!’
But I think it is also important to note that her promotion could possibly be purely down to her genitals. The main comments on this reshuffle have been on the ousting of “pale males” and appointment of more women (although it is an awful lot of hullabaloo over THREE new women, as if they totally tip the scales of gender division in politics. And then bringing in talks of positive discrimination making one BBC Radio 2 listener comment that they couldn’t believe how left-wing the Tories were… anyway, perhaps another rant for another time…). Although I think the emphasis on this point has been exaggerated it would be foolish to not see it as a ploy by Cameron to win over some votes for 2015. Not that I don’t think these women might be competent enough to gain these places by their own merits, I only doubt Cameron’s ability to think of them that way himself.
If we are then thinking with Cameron’s mind-set I would not put it past him to simply shove these women in places where he found the most convenient and had the least concern with. So, for one, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
This brings me to my final, more overarching point, on the fact that the very way that the environment is structured into the government’s concerns shows how much they are lacking. The environment, consistently, seems to be something tacked onto the end of other departments, in the DEFRA but also with the Department of Energy and Climate Change.
Not only is their importance undervalued in this way (why not have a Department of Environment and Climate Change?) the environmental issues are placed in conflict with the other aspects of these departments. For example if we want to examine pesticide use this would obviously come into the hands of the DEFRA with use of chemicals being more useful for farmers but leaving huge damage to the environment (& of course we know who will win out in this battle).
The point is more telling looking at the DECC, as I have discussed before. Although concerns over energy and climate change could be compatible we find the department over run by cronies of the Big Six energy companies and absolutely no one from the renewable energy sector. And so, the gaping problems of climate change are swept aside in favour of cold revenue.
So before we count Paterson’s ousting as a victory let’s remember that it is only working in their favour to celebrate when the new version is only the same. Personally, I will dislike and distrust Liz Truss until I am proved otherwise, and frankly, I’m not holding my breathe on this one..
Lost in the Industrial Jungle 