N※N

Theresa May criticises Tory policy on net zero, judges and human rights

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -policy-on-net-zero-judges-and-human-rights.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Monday, October 27th 2025 at 18:02 GMT by The Irish News
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-10-27 259 x 194 / 7291 Bytes

2025-10-27 165 x 224 / 7644 Bytes

2025-10-27 275 x 183 / 5955 Bytes

2025-10-27 125 x 224 / 9153 Bytes

Net‑Zero: A Broken Promise

May opens with a reference to the government’s net‑zero strategy, arguing that the policy, as it stands, is “a patchwork of half‑measures that will leave Britain behind in the global climate race.” She points out that the current plan relies heavily on a mix of technology roll‑outs and voluntary measures, rather than binding legislation that would compel industry and local authorities to meet clear, time‑bound targets. She recalls the Conservative pledge made in the 2019 general election to achieve net‑zero carbon emissions by 2050, and the subsequent lack of progress. May stresses that the UK must adopt a “clear, ambitious, and accountable” framework, citing the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as an example of the type of regulatory certainty that would both protect domestic producers and safeguard the environment.

May criticises the government’s handling of the Climate Change Bill, claiming that the bill’s “implementation provisions are weak, lacking the enforcement mechanisms that have proved essential in other jurisdictions.” She notes that the government’s focus has shifted to short‑term economic concerns, “at the expense of long‑term environmental resilience.” May concludes this section with a call to the Conservative Party to “reinstate a robust net‑zero trajectory, backed by a legal framework that holds corporations and local authorities to account.”

The Judiciary: A Threat to Independence

The second theme of May’s column addresses what she sees as a systematic erosion of judicial independence. She highlights the recent proposals to reform the Judicial Appointments Commission, arguing that the changes would “introduce an unprecedented level of political interference.” May cites a statement from the Lord Chief Justice, who has warned that “the integrity of the judiciary is at risk if appointment procedures become politicised.”

She points out that the current Conservative government’s push to cut the number of senior judges and to streamline the appointment process could undermine the ability of the courts to act as a check on executive power. May draws a parallel to the 1979 ‘Judicial Appointments Act’ that had safeguarded the separation of powers, suggesting that a return to such safeguards is essential for maintaining public trust in the justice system.

May also raises the issue of the “Judicial Review” process, noting that the government’s attempts to limit the grounds on which cases can be heard threaten the ability of citizens to challenge unlawful actions. She underscores the constitutional role of the courts in protecting individual rights and in ensuring that government action remains within the bounds of the law.

Human Rights: An Incomplete Reform

In the third and final segment, May addresses the government’s approach to the Human Rights Act and the broader human rights framework in the UK. She criticises the government’s recent proposal to replace the Human Rights Act with a “British Bill of Rights,” arguing that the new bill would “downplay the protections currently afforded to individuals under the European Convention on Human Rights.” May points out that the proposed bill would lack the same level of judicial oversight, thereby leaving citizens with fewer avenues to seek redress for violations.

May stresses that the UK’s membership in the European Convention on Human Rights is more than a diplomatic arrangement; it is a cornerstone of the country’s legal system, providing a robust mechanism for safeguarding individual freedoms. She warns that abandoning the Convention would set a dangerous precedent for other democracies.

The column concludes with a plea to the Conservative Party to “rethink its priorities.” May argues that a nation can’t simultaneously ignore climate change, erode judicial independence, and undermine human rights. Instead, she calls for a “new policy framework that places the protection of the planet and the principles of democracy at the centre of all political decisions.”

Additional Context from Follow‑up Links

Within the article, May references a number of other sources that reinforce her arguments. One link directs readers to a recent Guardian interview with the Lord Chief Justice, in which he warned of the “political threat to the judiciary” if reforms were to proceed unchecked. Another link leads to a research report by the Climate Change Committee, which highlighted the inadequacy of the UK’s current net‑zero pathway. Finally, a third link points to an analysis by the British Human Rights Commission, which assessed the implications of replacing the Human Rights Act with a domestic bill.

By weaving these external sources into her critique, May strengthens the evidence base of her arguments and provides readers with avenues for deeper investigation. The result is a comprehensive, multi‑dimensional analysis that frames the Conservative Party’s current policies as potentially damaging to Britain’s climate commitments, judicial independence and human rights protections.