In 2024, Zero Hour (with all of your help) campaigned in what we knew was the most important election for climate and nature in our lifetimes. We knew that whoever won would be in the driving seat of power until 2029: the most critical years in a defining decade for climate and nature action. In order to meet our targets and protect our communities from the growing realities of climate change and the breakdown of nature, we would need to see urgent action from whoever won. As we all know now, the winner was Labour. But as their first parliamentary session comes to an end, the question is, how have they done so far? They were elected on a promise of ‘Change’ and had the opportunity to deliver real climate-nature leadership and reclaim the UK’s historic role. Yet, we must be honest, it was no small feat, and the so-called ‘honeymoon’ period that most governments get, did not last long. Expectations were high, and after 14-years of austerity, the list of problems was long. Now almost two years in, we can see that there has been some real (and in some cases, massive) progress. We must celebrate that. But they have also made decisions that have taken us backwards and risked undermining the progress we have all worked so hard to achieve. Here’s where we think Labour’s first session in Government delivered, and where it fell short.
The Highs
Onshore Wind Is Back
On day one, Labour delivered the widely welcomed decision to lift the ban on onshore wind in England. For years, one of the cheapest and quickest forms of renewable energy was effectively blocked by planning restrictions. Removing those barriers opens the door to rapid deployment, lower energy bills, and increased energy security. It’s an important reminder that in some cases, climate progress doesn’t need to come from new inventions but from removing outdated obstacles.
Labour MPs co-sponsored and spoke in favour of the Climate and Nature Bill
The second reading of the Climate and Nature (CAN) Bill on 24 January 2025 marked a watershed moment. For one of the first times, climate and biodiversity were seriously discussed as interconnected crises requiring a joint response. Not only did Labour MPs co-sponsor the bill but we saw speeches from Labour MPs including Nadia Whitome, Clive Lewis and Andrew Cooper speak in favour of the science-led legislative plan. While ultimately the debate was adjourned, 24 January demonstrated growing political recognition that climate and nature requires a joined-up approach and urgent action. The adjournment opened the door for negotiated concessions from the government including backing the High Seas Treaty, an annual climate and nature statement and commitment to increased cross-departmental collaboration between DEFRA and DESNZ.
Stepping up for The High Seas Treaty
Following years of campaigning from Greenpeace, the Government finally introduced legislation to ratify the High Seas Treaty, which is a significant win for nature protection across the world. With a headline goal of protecting 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030, the treaty represents one of the most ambitious global biodiversity agreements in decades. The UK’s support reinforces its credibility and signals a willingness to seriously engage with global environmental governance.
Delivering Warmer Homes
With a cost-of-living crisis that just won’t go away, and global instability only making it worse, one of the biggest pressures people face is their bills. We know that the transition to renewables will mean cheaper bills in the long-run, and it will, but many are yet to feel those benefits. But this fact is now being weaponised by the likes of Nigel Farage. To respond to this, Labour unveiled its Warm Homes Plan, committing (a massive) £15 billion of investment to make our homes more efficient, insulated and affordable. This was a massive win for our movement.
No New Fossil Fuel Expansion
Arguably the biggest step in reducing UK emissions was the landmark decision to ban new oil and gas licences which signalled a clear break from the past. It aligns the UK more closely with climate science, and with institutions like the International Energy Agency, which has made clear that no new fossil fuel developments are compatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C. While questions remain about existing licences and “tiebacks” including the Rosebank, Cambo and Jackdaw oil and gas fields—this policy highlights that the era of expanding fossil fuel extraction in the UK should be coming to an end.
The Lows
Whilst these steps were marked progress on previous Governments, we know we remain off track and underprepared on the climate and nature crisis. So whilst renewables has made demonstrated progress, there remains significant concerns about the Labour Government’s approach to nature, its compatibility with transport and infrastructure projects, the influence of the fossil fuel lobby, and the looming possibility of expanded existing licences on oil and gas.
Growth at the Expense of Nature?
Whilst the Government celebrated its progress on renewables on one hand, on the other Rachel Reeves was waging war on nature with her infamous speech declaring that they should "focus on getting things built and stop worrying about the bats and the newts". Labour have made falsely claimed environmental protections are halting growth, despite it being proven false repeatedly. This myth was most evident in the government’s disregard of concerns about the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. The bill went on to be one of the most contentious elements of Labour’s legislative agenda facing widespread public and parliamentary scrutiny for being tone-deaf to the breakdown of nature across the UK. Framed as a way to promote growth and accelerate development, it has raised serious concerns among environmental groups. In particular, rhetoric around species protections, such as references to newts and bats as barriers to progress, has struck a nerve. Nature is not a “blocker” to development, it is foundational to long-term prosperity. Weakening protections risks repeating the very mistakes that have driven biodiversity decline in the first place. However thanks to Zero Hour ally Chris Hinchcliffe’s amendments, there were some protections won by MPs including protections for chalk streams.
Airport Expansion Sends the Wrong Signal
Whilst Labour has rightly focused on decarbonising electricity, it remains off track on transport announcing its support for expansion at both Gatwick Airport and Heathrow Airport, raising serious questions about the compatibility with carbon budgets, and Labour’s commitment to reducing aviation emissions. Aviation is one of the hardest sectors to decarbonise and expanding capacity now risks locking in emissions for decades to come. Whilst much has been made about rollout of more SAF in aviation, “sustainable” aviation fuel creates huge environmental damage internationally including deforestation in critical ecosystems. At a time when difficult choices are needed, this risks being seen as a step in the wrong direction.
Fossil Fuel Influence Still Lingers
You might be asking yourself, why is Labour not moving away from oil and gas, why is its Carbon Budget Delivery and Growth Strategy fixated on technology solutions like Carbon Capture? It could be connected to the over 500 meetings between the Government and fossil fuel lobbyists. While engagement with industry is part of policymaking, the balance is essential. At a moment when rapid decarbonisation is critical, the perception of continued fossil fuel influence risks undermining public trust. If they have so much time for oil and gas, surely they could give a little more time to meeting scientists, energy experts and campaigners like you who have raised concerns about existing climate policies.
The threat of a Three-Line Whip on the CAN Bill
Perhaps the most disappointing moment for many campaigners came when Labour had the opportunity to deliver legally binding targets fit to meet the challenge of the climate and nature crisis: the Climate and Nature Bill. Instead the Government threatened a three-line whip against the CAN Bill, preventing it from advancing into law. A clear demonstration there remains an ambition gap between what the Government sign up to as part of international negotiations, and what the national government is willing to make law. After a debate that highlighted the urgency of addressing climate and nature together, the decision to adjourn the debate on the Climate and Nature Bill signalled caution where many had hoped for leadership. It also exposed a deeper tension within the party, between a leadership focused on control and delivery, and MPs pushing for more ambitious environmental action.
Where Is the Plan?
After a turbulent first session, the Government report card is a disconcerting mix of highs and lows leaving us off track and underprepared for the full scale of the climate and nature crisis. The answer many of you received in response was that the Government was focused on getting on with the job. Despite this, while Labour has made strong commitments, particularly on clean energy investment, questions remain about how these translate into a coherent strategy for meeting future carbon budgets. The Carbon Budget Delivery and Growth Strategy was released to widespread concern and has yet to fully convince critics that the plan is adequate to get us back on track. Whilst introducing, the strategy offers some welcomed signs of progress, but is far from adequate with rollbacks on tree planting, peatland restoration and an over-reliance on unproven carbon capture and storage. Without a clear, integrated roadmap, there is a risk that climate ambitions will fragment, delivered in parts, and not at the scale or speed required.
This first parliamentary session has indicated important markers. Labour has shown it can act on fossil fuels, on renewables, and on the global stage. But it has also shown the limits of its current approach, particularly where climate and nature goals come into conflict with short-term economic priorities. The next session then, will be critical. The question is no longer whether Labour believes in climate action, but whether it is willing to match that belief with the consistency and action the moment demands. The window for getting this right is narrowing, and the stakes could not be higher.
