0:00

Tired of ads barging into your favorite

0:02

news podcasts? Good news! Ad-free

0:04

listening is available on Amazon Music for

0:06

all the music plus top podcasts included

0:09

with your Prime membership. Stay

0:11

up to date on everything Newsworthy by downloading

0:13

the Amazon Music app for free. Or

0:15

go to amazon.com/news ad free.

0:18

That's amazon.com slash news ad

0:20

free to catch up on the latest episodes

0:22

without the ads. Acast

0:26

powers the world's best podcasts.

0:29

Here's a show that we recommend. J.D.

0:38

Power ranks sleep number number one

0:40

in customer satisfaction with mattresses purchased

0:42

in store. And now, the Queen

0:45

Sleep Number C4 Smart Bed is

0:47

only $1,499. Save

0:50

$400 for a limited time. For

0:53

J.D. Power 2023 award information, visit

0:56

jdpower.com/awards. Only at sleep

0:58

number stores or sleepnumber.com.

1:02

Prices higher in Alaska and Hawaii. You

1:07

gotta hand it to the farmers, man. Just

1:11

a few weeks ago, they were here in Brussels,

1:14

jamming the roads with hundreds of

1:17

tractors, burning tires on plaszlak, spraying

1:19

manure on cops. They

1:22

did have some specific demands among all

1:25

the chaos, like dialing back Green Deal

1:27

rules and stopping cheap food imports from

1:29

Ukraine. So in

1:31

my other job here at Politico, I

1:33

write about lobbying, and that's all schmoozing

1:35

and white papers. But wouldn't

1:38

you know it, these farmers got way

1:40

better results, way faster. There

1:43

was this idea to make funds under

1:45

the Common Agriculture Policy, known as CAP,

1:48

contingent on meeting new green targets. That's

1:51

gone. Cutting pesticide use? No

1:53

longer an issue. Promotion of eating less

1:56

meat? Out the window. And

1:59

last but not least. imports from

2:01

Ukraine have been severely curbed.

2:04

Read it in weep city slick or lobbyist. Usually

2:07

it takes years to get anything done

2:09

in Brussels but this U-turn took just

2:11

weeks. Then again

2:14

timing was in the farmer's favor. These

2:16

changes are just in time for the

2:18

crucial European election in June. Is

2:20

this a sign of a broader green backlash

2:22

at the ballot box? I'm

2:27

Sarah Wheaton, host of EU Confidential. This

2:30

week EU leaders were back in town for summit

2:32

talks and while there weren't tractors on

2:34

the roads the farmers demand still

2:36

weighed heavy on their minds. Joining

2:39

me are climate comms guru Tom Brooks

2:42

and my colleague Carl Matheson to unpack

2:44

the politics of this possible green backlash.

2:47

But before we get into climate politics let's

2:50

look at some climate reality. A

2:53

new report by the European Environment

2:55

Agency is harsh. You

2:57

heard a million times that we need to do

2:59

more to stop climate change but

3:01

this new assessment underlines that we're not

3:04

doing enough to prepare for the change

3:06

that's already inevitable including

3:08

in the agriculture sector. We all know

3:10

by now that last year 2023 was

3:12

the warmest year on

3:14

record by a huge margin. This

3:16

is unfortunately the new normal. Our

3:18

report demonstrates an urgent need to

3:20

do more. We can and we

3:22

must do more. That

3:24

was chief of the European Environment

3:26

Agency Lena Ilamoninen presenting the report

3:28

to the Environment Committee earlier this

3:30

week. Just a few MEPs bothered

3:33

to show up. Fortunately my

3:35

colleague Zia Vysa always shows up and she's indeed

3:37

here with me now in our studio in

3:39

Brussels. Zia last week

3:41

you wrote about a new report

3:44

out from the European Environment Agency

3:46

with their first ever climate risk assessment. I mean

3:49

I feel like these types of things are coming

3:51

out all the time. Did This

3:53

have anything new or surprising to say? I Mean

3:55

it was new in the sense that it's the

3:58

first report that's really granular. Use

4:00

Preparedness! So when we talk

4:03

about reducing the impacts of

4:05

climate change, On our societies,

4:07

our economy's. We have two main

4:10

lovers and one as reducing how much

4:12

C O two were pumping. And yeah,

4:14

because that. Determines. How much

4:16

more mean that is that the main

4:18

level and that's really important, but the

4:20

other Leva is preparing for some of

4:22

these impacts that are already inevitable that

4:24

we can already say a highly likely

4:26

so for example, that means and reinforcing

4:28

coastal protection to deal with sea level

4:30

rise. If we're not using these levers,

4:32

let's maybe to about the one on

4:34

what we can look out for. I

4:36

mean, what's that saying? We need to

4:38

just already be kind of accepting as

4:40

an inevitable reality. Plenty say some fit

4:43

his and sorta time horizons and some.

4:45

Her and longer so and sea level rise.

4:47

we already know even if we stop. The

4:49

booming now is inevitable to degree

4:52

but it it's slow rise heat

4:54

waves though. We seen that happen

4:57

like extreme heat. Ah, we might

4:59

see that again in a few

5:01

months. And and as flood stairs,

5:03

extreme weather storms and those have

5:06

all sort of cascading impacts on

5:08

our life in various sectors. So

5:10

does consider like a heatwave right?

5:13

that might have impact on human

5:15

health.a will have impact on agriculture

5:17

because there might be a drops

5:20

at the same time and all

5:22

have stopped and has an impact

5:24

on economic. Productivity for example, say

5:26

that lots of little things little

5:28

lovers to prepare and at his

5:31

report lays out quite a few

5:33

of them as a what were

5:35

some of the top recommendations. One

5:37

top recommendations actually to find out

5:39

who's responsible lot Because preparing for

5:41

climate change is one of these

5:43

things lab. lots of actors have

5:45

to work together. So the you

5:47

national governments, regional governments, cities, Because

5:50

the you can't. Be responsible for the

5:52

know that the types of a specific

5:54

region rates but what do you can

5:57

do is pass mobilize and funding or

5:59

help maybe lights of the funding for

6:01

that was one big thing to report

6:03

said. the current funding mechanisms in the

6:05

you are not sustainable of for what

6:07

we are likely to see so we

6:09

need more money than as Also just

6:11

you know take that into account when

6:13

designing a policies, maybe update some of

6:16

your policies, maybe to ease workers' rights

6:18

regulations need to take into account that

6:20

extreme heat as now real danger for

6:22

outdoor workers and also just coordinate on

6:24

the ease of old path. One really

6:26

concrete saying this report said over and

6:28

over again as that. It's high time. To

6:31

act on our ecosystems to protect our

6:33

ecosystems and of funds a bit. Tree.

6:35

Hugging. Maybe you know, protect nature,

6:37

but it really isn't because we're

6:39

not gonna have stable food supply

6:41

of water supply without stable ecosystems.

6:44

This report says that we have

6:46

to be really taking action out

6:48

to a store some of our

6:50

ecosystems to a healthy state. which

6:52

includes since I'm really sensitive political

6:54

decisions like in reducing. Pollution from agriculture,

6:56

for example, and that's quite a hot topic at

6:58

the moment. So. The last week

7:00

and Strasburg you are interviewing that

7:02

you climate commissioner with the extra

7:05

keys from the center I it's

7:07

how is he reacting to the

7:09

support the commission reacted formerly by

7:11

and. What's known as a

7:13

communication which is a sort of you know,

7:15

initiative paper which has no legislative. Proposals

7:17

for were sort of not expecting that

7:19

stage because of where we are out

7:22

in the electoral time you know the

7:24

leading up to the next set of

7:26

you policy makers. At the same time

7:28

that text was criticized for being a

7:30

bit weak and vague. Some people did

7:33

speculate whether that was due to the

7:35

fact that there is a like the

7:37

spring green backlash indie you even though

7:39

that's not really focused on matters to

7:41

paparazzo to like reduce emissions. So what

7:44

does paper tried to do is to

7:46

make soft economic. Case for preparing

7:48

for climate change by. spelling

7:50

out to cost of inox and one

7:52

thing what the hoekstra told me and

7:54

will and i think also sad and

7:56

when he was presenting not report is

7:58

that resembled a flood since last

8:00

year. They cost the country 16% of

8:02

its GDP and that was a single

8:05

event. So there's like a huge cost

8:07

to inaction and I think that's sort

8:09

of like how they're trying to also

8:11

make it appeal to

8:13

more conservative parties as sort of

8:15

something that's necessary. That said, I

8:18

mean while Hoekstra did dodge pretty

8:20

much any question asked about agriculture,

8:22

he did eventually say that, you

8:24

know, we need as much and

8:26

maybe even more climate action in

8:28

the next term, perhaps with a

8:30

stronger focus on social fairness

8:33

and economic competitiveness. And

8:35

I don't know if he meant that in the sense of policies

8:37

or in the sense of narrative, but

8:40

I think he was pretty clear that he

8:42

didn't want a stop, a hard

8:44

stop to green lawmaking. This

8:47

paper came out a week ago. What have

8:49

you been seeing as far as the

8:51

discourse in the member countries in Brussels?

8:53

I think what this is, is it

8:56

sort of kickstarts discussions because the EU

8:58

so far has mainly focused on reducing

9:00

emissions, but it hasn't really

9:02

focused on preparing. So I think this

9:05

is a huge signal to the next

9:07

Commission as well that there's

9:09

something that really needs to be done

9:11

on a preparation front. I've heard from

9:13

several European lawmakers as well that want

9:16

perhaps a more formalised approach to this

9:18

in the next term, so a law

9:20

of European climate resilience law. So that's something

9:23

we could see perhaps in the coming years

9:25

or at least we could see demand for

9:27

it in the coming years. And

9:30

this report is sort of the backbone for

9:32

why we need that. And it's spelled it

9:34

out very clearly. So it's saying, look, we

9:36

can all hope to reduce emissions and achieve

9:38

things, but we just have to face reality

9:40

and this is what's going to happen. It's

9:42

not saying climate change is happening

9:44

and we should give up on reducing emissions, right?

9:47

These are very much two things that need to

9:49

be happening at the same time,

9:51

because you can't prepare for runaway climate

9:53

change. You can't prepare for like four

9:55

degrees of warming because there's like consequences.

9:57

that we can't even imagine. But it's

9:59

a second strand into EU's Green Deal,

10:02

and I think we'll be seeing more

10:04

of that in the coming years. Well,

10:06

thank you so much, Zia. This is

10:08

really helpful. Our next conversation is going

10:10

to look at kind of exactly what

10:12

you were saying, is this relationship

10:15

between policies and narrative and how

10:17

people are feeling on the ground.

10:20

So thanks for helping us understand the

10:22

real kind of stakes as

10:24

far as the temperature, our health, and our

10:27

pocketbooks. So thanks for coming by. Thanks for

10:29

having me. So

10:32

next we're going to be talking to a master of

10:34

narrative, and a reporter who's been listening

10:36

to what people are actually thinking on the ground. Coming

10:39

up after the break. Stay with us. Tired

10:46

of ads barging into your favorite news

10:48

podcasts? Good news. Ad-free

10:50

listening is available on Amazon Music, or

10:52

all the music plus top podcasts included

10:54

with your Prime membership. Stay

10:57

up to date on everything newsworthy by downloading

10:59

the Amazon Music app for free, or

11:01

go to amazon.com/news ad free.

11:04

That's amazon.com/news ad free to catch

11:06

up on the latest episodes without

11:08

the ads. Introducing Wondersuite

11:11

from bluehost.com. Website

11:13

creation is hard, but now with Bluehost,

11:15

you can answer a few simple questions

11:18

about your business and get a unique

11:20

WordPress website or store right away. From

11:23

there, you can customize your design, colors,

11:25

and content. And Bluehost

11:27

automatically helps you get found

11:29

in search engines like Google

11:31

and Bing. From step-by-step guidance

11:33

to suggested plugins, Bluehost makes

11:35

WordPress wonderful for everyone. Go

11:37

to bluehost.com slash Wondersuite. So

11:43

joining me here in the studio is Tom Brooks,

11:45

the CEO of the Melior Foundation. And

11:48

zooming in from London is Carl Matheson,

11:50

my colleague who's a senior climate correspondent

11:52

here at Politico. So Carl, we invited

11:54

you because you've been covering climate policies

11:57

and traveling around the block, talking to

11:59

especially your... farmers and

12:02

they have suddenly had this outsized

12:04

impact. This podcast will air

12:06

on the five-year and one-week anniversary

12:08

of the first really massive Fridays

12:10

for future protests around the world

12:12

with around a million students coming

12:15

out to protest for climate action.

12:17

But now, Carl, as

12:19

you've been learning and we've all

12:21

been seeing, it's the farmers rolling their

12:23

tractors into capitals and to border

12:26

crossings that have really seemed to

12:28

be driving European politics. And

12:31

so Carl, can you just kind of walk us through

12:33

some of the changes that we've seen policy-wise

12:35

as a result of this pressure

12:37

from farmers? I guess the trouble

12:40

really started last year when Dutch

12:43

conservatives got wiped out in

12:46

provincial elections in the Netherlands and that

12:48

freaked out the conservatives in the European

12:51

Parliament. And what we've seen after that,

12:53

as well as the farmers protest piling on the

12:56

pressure in the last few months, is

12:58

that conservative bloc have moved against a

13:01

whole slew of green measures. Probably

13:03

the most significant was a

13:05

commission proposal that would

13:07

have set binding targets to

13:09

heal nature across 30% of the

13:13

EU's land and sea area. That's now been

13:15

watered down to 20% and aspects of it

13:18

have been weakened. There's

13:20

also been a number of other examples

13:22

when the EU tried to map out

13:26

its roadmap to cut emissions to 2040.

13:28

Mentions of how agriculture

13:32

could contribute were taken out. Even

13:35

in the last week our colleague Bartosz

13:37

Brzezinski scooped that a

13:39

whole bunch of the incremental green gains

13:41

made under the EU's subsidy

13:43

scheme, the cap, have been proposed

13:45

to be taken out. And then

13:47

on top of that farmers have also

13:50

been protesting about some of the free

13:52

trade provisions that have been made to

13:54

support Ukrainian farmers and this

13:56

week we've seen that they've won

13:59

import cap on sugar, poultry,

14:01

eggs, but not the big one

14:03

that they really want to grain.

14:05

I think all in all there's

14:08

a sense that farmers are setting

14:10

the political agenda in Brussels, particularly

14:12

on climate change and biodiversity, to

14:14

agree that some argue massively outweighs

14:16

their share of population or contribution

14:18

to the economy, while farmers would

14:21

say they're a vital part of

14:23

this economy and food supply and

14:25

so it actually represents a fair

14:27

reflection of their importance. Tom,

14:29

you've been kind of one of the

14:31

people in Brussels who's really been at

14:33

the vanguard of thinking about how to

14:35

make the case for climate

14:38

action, whether it's to the

14:40

media, to policymakers, or to

14:42

voters. We kind of think

14:45

of climate scientists as using very technical

14:47

language and trying to explain things and

14:49

you've been working on polling, message testing,

14:51

and other ways of bringing kind of

14:53

more traditional PR to making the case

14:55

for climate action. And given what Carl was

14:58

saying about, you know, this may be outweighing

15:00

farmers role in the economy, I mean, farmers

15:02

just found like the secret to political influence

15:05

or are politicians responding to

15:07

kind of what they think is a broader

15:09

sentiment among the electorate of sort of wanting

15:11

to hit the brakes on some of these

15:13

Green Deal changes? Obviously asking

15:16

those politicians what they think they're responding

15:18

to would be really interesting. What we

15:20

do know is that climate and action

15:22

on climate remain salient across the political

15:24

spectrum. It waves in to some extent,

15:26

obviously, depending on which piece of the

15:29

political spectrum you're talking about. But even

15:31

in a time when there's a war

15:33

in Europe, inflation's running high, there are

15:35

a lot of things that people are

15:37

concerned about. Climate remains a top five

15:39

issue across the political spectrum

15:41

pretty much. There's exceptions of the extremes.

15:44

Senator Wright voters have climate top four

15:47

and five in every major country in

15:49

Europe And that remains the case,

15:51

even the most recent polling that we've done..

15:53

So That's not changing. What is clearly the

15:56

case is that agriculture as a driver of.

16:00

Global Warming He has increased massively over

16:02

the last period. Globally emissions from agriculture

16:04

are now pretty much having as much

16:06

warming impact as emissions from burning fossil

16:09

fuels. So what is clear is that

16:11

there is a transition necessary, right? And

16:13

this transitions. Obviously, in every area of

16:16

policy, pretty much all policy is now

16:18

transition policy. And that is is clearly

16:20

an area that needs work in terms

16:22

of how it's gonna land. With the

16:25

Psalms protests, it's a complex picture, does

16:27

a lot back there right now and

16:29

we'll know. The C A P makes up

16:31

thirty percent of the European budget, and this is

16:33

a community who feels left behind an abandoned. Those

16:35

two things. Logically, Don't seem to

16:38

make a lot of sense so something and

16:40

as girl. Center A politicians are

16:42

say this isn't a farmer's Many

16:44

people are feeling left behind that

16:46

climate policies went too far and

16:48

it's time to hit the brakes.

16:50

Well. I think obviously you've got to

16:52

evaluate on what level climate policies when

16:55

to call them gone too far in

16:57

addressing climate change. What is clear is

16:59

that the social impacts of these policies

17:01

or something you've really got to get

17:03

right and you've gotta think about. And

17:05

I think that has definitely been an

17:07

issue around understanding climate policy as. Purely.

17:10

Emissions Reduction Policy. Or is it's not.

17:12

It's social policy. It's industrial policy. It's

17:14

employment policies. It has it impacts on

17:16

all of those things. And so you've

17:18

got to see it in the round.

17:20

If just look at it from an

17:22

emissions reductions perspective, then you're missing all

17:25

of that color. Essentially all about three,

17:27

the nature of any policy and because

17:29

in twenties when he saw all policy

17:31

is climate policy, All economics is climb

17:33

economics, all lived experience is the experience

17:35

of the climate crisis that is now

17:37

true everywhere in the world and so.

17:40

Positions. Are gonna have to stop

17:42

thinking about these policies and particular Also.

17:44

The. Narratives around these policies stop thinking

17:46

about those purely in in the narrow

17:49

version of emissions reduction or indeed, the

17:51

narrow view of addressing climate change because

17:53

they have to address a number of

17:55

things as well: Social cohesion, social, and

17:58

cause he is daily very high. Of

18:00

the gender of those obviously the

18:02

European Greendale. Has resulted in

18:04

very significant renewables build out in

18:06

Europe. There is a lot more

18:09

to come if the targets get

18:11

delivered. Renewables are hugely popular. Across.

18:13

All political spectrums console European countries, and

18:15

we see that again and again. The

18:18

polling. A pulls up there with

18:20

do you like your children I mean

18:22

it's really really really high. Their policies

18:24

which a much less popular banning stuff

18:26

doesn't go down well. But. Again, a

18:28

lot of I is about framing. But.

18:30

It's not policy in a vacuum. It's

18:33

not policy in a vacuum Carl you

18:35

have then out around Europe talking to

18:37

people on the ground getting a sense

18:39

as how they're feeling. How.

18:42

Policy. Is whether they're climate economic

18:44

trade, Ukraine how they're affecting their

18:46

allies. What's their sunset? The narrative

18:48

at the mean. It's right

18:50

to say that there's a lot

18:52

of people that do feel left

18:55

behind or even if the not

18:57

less behind some of the wealthiest

18:59

people in Europe also feeling some

19:01

kind of anxiety about climate policies

19:04

and that's may be more tied

19:06

up in a broader sense of

19:08

anxiety about a loss of status

19:10

that is quite pervasive in European

19:12

politics. right? Now I'm really

19:14

curious tome about the sense that

19:17

you have because green groups for

19:19

a long time now have been

19:21

arguing that what you to said

19:23

that if this consensus about climate

19:25

change that across the board Paypal

19:28

One climate accents and I think

19:30

what I come up against sometimes

19:32

is maybe there is semi moved.

19:34

We say it like eighty ninety

19:36

percent. Support. of very broad

19:39

brush idea of yes we want to

19:41

do something about this issue but talking

19:43

said conservative politicians they are considered is

19:45

not with their life sixty or seventy

19:48

or eighty percent of people to that

19:50

would support a specific policy but aren't

19:52

gonna go to the polls this early

19:54

to vote for it it's the ten

19:57

or twenty percent of people that really

19:59

hate it and are highly motivated and

20:01

are actually going to withdraw their support.

20:04

And that maybe is what we see

20:06

with the farmers. It's a small, highly

20:08

motivated group that see this as a

20:10

threat. So I just wonder how you

20:13

compute that sort of maybe like mile

20:15

wide, but inch deep support

20:17

versus a much narrower, but

20:20

potentially deeply held opposition. It's

20:23

a really good question, Carl. And I think that

20:25

it is in a political

20:27

context, which is increasingly polarized

20:29

in a debate which happens

20:32

in an information ecosystem,

20:34

which is in and of

20:36

itself increasingly polarized and indeed

20:38

which is driven by mechanisms

20:40

which we know increase polarization.

20:43

You do get a much, much louder

20:45

extreme and all good propaganda is

20:47

built on a kernel of truth. That's also

20:49

true. And I think it comes back

20:52

to the point, as you say, we do

20:54

have this very, very broad base. A lot of

20:56

people are very worried about the impacts of climate

20:58

change. I mean, debates in Southern Europe have really

21:00

changed about this. It's interesting to see a very

21:02

much center right leader in Greece

21:04

talking constantly about the need to address the

21:07

climate crisis because the Greek people are living

21:09

it and they see it every day. So

21:11

it is reshaping politics and it

21:14

is reshaping discourse. But I do

21:16

think that essentially what you're seeing

21:18

here is the way that climate policy

21:20

is being interpreted into some of these spaces

21:22

and that it possibly is responsible for some

21:24

of the issues that these people are having.

21:26

But this is a set of people who

21:28

are not feeling heard, who are not feeling

21:30

like their issues are being addressed. And that

21:32

was clear with the farmers. Being

21:34

a family farmer in Europe has been really

21:36

hard. I mean, you've just got to look

21:38

at the suicide rates. Those numbers

21:41

are just devastating. I mean, so

21:43

awful. And it gets worse

21:45

and worse. And we know that these are

21:47

community. This is massively under pressure. Now, to

21:49

an extent, rolling back European climate policy is

21:51

not going to fix their problems. That's not

21:54

what the answer is here. But

21:56

what is clear is, is there any extent to

21:58

which it's contributing to them? Are we understanding? standing,

22:00

the kind of 360 view of what it

22:02

now means to be a family farmer in

22:04

Europe. It's complex stuff. So

22:06

earlier this week I hosted

22:09

a political event that was

22:11

considering ways that policies could

22:13

be both sustainable but also

22:15

promote European competitiveness and Kurt

22:17

Vandenberg, the top civil

22:19

servant working on Green Deal policy was there and

22:22

I said, look, you know, are

22:24

you worried that you're going to have to spend the

22:26

next five years rolling back the

22:29

policies that you spent the past five years implementing?

22:31

And he said, no, no, it's going to be

22:33

okay. We're still going to be able to put

22:35

them in place. No, don't worry too much

22:37

about it. Maybe we'll have... But we

22:39

do need to talk about things differently. One

22:42

message that he suggested is saying, look,

22:44

we don't care about the planet with

22:46

these green policies. We care about people

22:48

and their lives, but this is not

22:51

about the planet. We're not doing

22:53

this for the planet. The planet couldn't

22:55

care less if it warms three or ten

22:57

degrees. We're doing this to

23:00

keep the planet livable for

23:02

our economy, for human civilization. So

23:05

we don't care about the planet.

23:07

We care about the continuation of

23:09

human civilization and the economy. That's

23:12

why we do it. And I think if you

23:14

have this kind of discussion... What

23:17

do you think? What are the

23:19

messages we should be looking out

23:21

for in this election from climate

23:23

advocates that will also be compelling

23:25

to voters? All of the polling

23:27

that we're doing shows that you definitely do

23:29

have climate as a very significant part of

23:31

the mix of salience issues. And this is

23:33

stuff that people have got on their minds.

23:36

Inflation is definitely up there. Cost of living crisis

23:38

in various different ways. The war in Ukraine and

23:41

migration plays a role in there as well. And

23:43

so depending on which slice of the

23:46

electorate you're talking about, those lie

23:48

at different places on that top five list,

23:50

but they're all broadly there, maybe top seven,

23:52

top eight. You can talk about

23:54

competitiveness. You can talk about job creation, for example.

23:56

A lot of the message testing that we've done

23:58

shows that... Creation. As.

24:01

A message does next land with normal people

24:03

at all. It just doesn't work because it's

24:05

not about them. It's not local. It's just

24:07

three metre. Very important if you're

24:09

an M P, or a decision maker or whatever

24:11

if you're essentially in that in the elite. Jobs.

24:14

Messages work if you up in the public's

24:16

they really don't. I think you've got to

24:18

be talking about this stuff as a response

24:21

to the problem for every one Is very

24:23

worried about the level of climate concern across

24:25

almost every piece. The audience is huge and

24:27

people want to know that governments are trying

24:30

to act on this problem and do the

24:32

right thing. They also want to know that

24:34

they can do it in a way which

24:37

is fair. not gonna distribute the pain inequitably

24:39

and is also going to distribute the benefits

24:41

equitably And so I think the trick is

24:43

not. To stop talking about. The. Planet

24:46

People Care people. I'm very very

24:48

worried about climate change. When.

24:50

You poll mass public's the massive majority

24:52

concern and the message that lands absolutely

24:55

best is look after planet for for

24:57

your kids for future generations, right? And

24:59

that has just much much much more

25:02

residents across the world than any other.

25:05

Framing. But it resonates hugely, right.

25:07

Much more than you know pocketbook stuff. But

25:09

elections are about to a significant degree pocketbook

25:11

south. and so you've gotta get that combination,

25:14

right, I think. But the idea of even

25:16

just kind of about our environmental policy isn't

25:18

about the by both know it is. it

25:20

just has to be about a bunch of

25:23

of things to. How what

25:25

is your son? several as how people are

25:27

thinking about that and the commission and are

25:29

they distrust To see some of these rollbacks.

25:32

Some of the reporting that I've been

25:34

to a around this I think reflects

25:36

what you said. the

25:39

concessions and have been made

25:41

safe to farmers are the

25:43

moments a kind is on

25:45

the margins and potentially not

25:47

particularly meaningful when it comes

25:49

to reduce the agricultural emissions

25:51

through the next twenty or

25:53

thirty years less that hard

25:55

work is gonna come later

25:57

but it is gonna come

26:00

I think the really interesting

26:02

political question facing the EU

26:04

right now and kind of

26:06

personified in the Commission President

26:08

Ursula von der Leyen, who of course is

26:11

a member of the European People's

26:13

Party, she is a European Conservative, this

26:15

is the party that is putting pressure

26:18

to make these rollbacks, is

26:20

if she becomes the next Commission

26:23

President, which is looking increasingly likely,

26:26

then is the next von

26:28

der Leyen Commission going to take on

26:30

the agricultural industry? Because

26:33

it's just pure mathematics, this industry

26:35

does have to reduce its emissions

26:37

if we're going to reach net

26:39

zero. But we all

26:41

know that the history of

26:43

this problem is about

26:46

incumbent industries resisting change.

26:49

And I think one way of seeing what's

26:51

happening in the last few months is the

26:53

agricultural industry beginning to see the writing on

26:55

the wall and the resistance,

26:58

the political resistance from a

27:00

grassroots level but also from a high

27:02

level lobbying level is really

27:04

coming into force and it's going

27:07

to be a very, very difficult

27:09

political fight. We're going to have

27:11

to see if the Commission and

27:13

potentially Ursula von der Leyen have

27:15

kind of got the gumption and

27:17

the political capital to take that

27:19

on. What was interesting about the event that I

27:21

was referring to is we did have the head

27:24

of the chemicals lobby. He made

27:26

the argument, look, we want to change,

27:28

we want innovation, that's certainly the buzzword

27:30

in industry is innovation, but the subtext

27:33

was somebody's got to help us pay

27:35

to make this transition and that money

27:37

should be public money. This

27:40

kind of goes to the heart of a

27:42

lot of the broader issue that this idea

27:44

of climate blowback is probably, it's not just

27:46

isolated to farmers, as you said. Ultimately,

27:49

the question of climate change

27:51

might be, yeah, we

27:53

absolutely want action on it, but

27:55

like, do I really have to pay for

27:57

that? It's these big industries or it's my

28:00

government should be helping me. Where

28:02

does the responsibility to actually hit

28:04

the hit pocket, feel some social

28:07

pain, or just like change your

28:09

lifestyle, where does that sort

28:11

of come in and where do people accept

28:13

it? And also, really crucially,

28:15

I think, do people feel

28:18

as though if they're going

28:20

to pay something, that the big end of town

28:22

is also going to pay? Because that's where the

28:24

far right are playing right now. The far right

28:26

are telling a story, a big

28:28

broad story about the EU that is

28:30

elites levying all the costs

28:33

onto you, whatever it be. And climate

28:36

change is becoming part of that story, I think,

28:38

that the commission

28:40

is going to make you

28:42

pay for the pollution that

28:44

big companies have put into

28:46

the atmosphere. So seeing

28:48

climate change in that regard gives

28:50

it this political potency that I don't

28:53

think the left side of the

28:55

spectrum or even the center of the spectrum have

28:57

really come up with a powerful answer to it.

28:59

Like, this is going to require sacrifice,

29:01

but everybody's going to sacrifice equally and we're

29:03

going to help you. I don't think that

29:05

that has been provided as

29:07

a convincing answer to the far right

29:09

narrative yet. Why haven't you figured it out,

29:12

Tom? I totally

29:14

agree with Carl. I think that's really right. Some

29:16

of the things that have started to shift

29:18

in this space, obviously there

29:20

is an increasing amount of

29:23

discussion around taxation, particularly, for

29:25

example, on the windfall profits

29:27

that the fossil fuel industry

29:29

made with the price bike

29:32

that happened after Putin's invasion of Ukraine

29:34

and taxing those profits in order to

29:36

put more money into essentially transition policy.

29:39

You've also obviously got policies, probably

29:42

most well-known one being the Inflation Reduction

29:44

Act in the US, which is essentially

29:46

a transition subsidies play. That's subsidies

29:48

for US made electric vehicles. And

29:51

a whole bunch of other goods, which

29:53

essentially push towards decarbonisation of the US

29:55

economy. Those kinds of policies do

29:57

have that social element to some extent, although there

29:59

are some people who argue that they're still

30:02

putting too much money in the hands of

30:04

big corporations who are responsible for this pollution.

30:06

I do think that the question of how

30:08

the profits of pollution are going to be

30:10

dealt with and what role they have to

30:12

play in the cost of transition is significant

30:15

and that's definitely going to have to be

30:17

something that people get their heads around. I

30:20

don't have the perfect answer for it.

30:22

Tom, do you think that this idea

30:24

of climate blowback is overstated though in

30:27

the political discourse in Brussels? We

30:29

do not see it in the

30:31

numbers. The polling and message testing and

30:33

focus groups that we've been doing over

30:35

these past few months do not show

30:37

that you've got significant impact, certainly not

30:39

of the scale that seems to be

30:42

implied if you read Polisko every day,

30:44

for example. That is not to say

30:46

that there has been no impact of

30:48

climate policy on farmers and they shouldn't

30:50

be complaining about it. Of course there

30:52

has. These things need to be

30:54

thought about and managed and as I said,

30:56

a third of the European budget gets spent

30:58

on the agricultural industry and they're feeling left

31:01

behind and not looked after. Something

31:03

has gone wrong. Those two facts

31:05

shouldn't both be true. Where did all the money

31:07

go? Because it's clearly not ending up in the

31:09

hands of family farmers or at least not in

31:11

a way that's managing to help them. There

31:13

is questions about the shape of the

31:16

industry. There is questions about the shape

31:18

of how the transition is being supported,

31:20

how different actors in that transition are

31:22

being supported and what the relationships between

31:24

those are. Carl, you mentioned obviously the

31:27

lobby has definitely come into its own

31:29

during this around the farmers' protests but

31:31

that is also not to dismiss those

31:33

protests. There is clearly a very, very

31:35

hard life being a family farmer in

31:38

Europe these days. Both those

31:40

things can be true. It's not that the

31:42

backlash is completely made up but it's certainly

31:45

been spun very heavily. There

31:47

are actors who see this

31:49

as an opportunity to slow down climate

31:51

policy. I think all

31:53

of those things are contributing to the state of

31:55

the debate right now. Carl, what's

31:57

your sense of what is action?

32:00

The we're going to determine the.

32:02

Next Commissions climate roads. Do you

32:04

think they will be reacting to

32:06

the elections to sentiment coming from

32:09

from member countries? Or is there

32:11

sort of system a steady pace

32:13

that might be adjusted on the

32:15

margins as we've just seen, but

32:17

will kind of generally continue to

32:19

move forward with the screen Their

32:21

policies. One. Of the Cave

32:23

Bear about this moment the

32:25

why it exists for a

32:28

long is that Ursula Von

32:30

the Lions constituency forgetting re

32:32

elected old, reinstated as Commission

32:34

president is now essentially the

32:36

European Parliament and the European

32:38

People's Party. these the biggest

32:40

party in that parliament so

32:42

that gives them a potency

32:45

and to the next commission

32:47

comes into. Place. It

32:49

quite a heightens the tension and

32:51

the power of the A P.

32:53

Speaking to a Pp. Alberich as

32:56

at the moment who feel as

32:58

though they have absolutely relegated to

33:00

green gail and they do not

33:02

think that it will be a

33:05

driving force as it was in

33:07

the last Mandates bought this question

33:09

about whether it needs to be

33:11

the commission past the most comprehensive

33:13

set of climate laws probably in

33:16

the world in the last four

33:18

years. When they are now

33:20

in law yes, theory of important issues

33:22

around agriculture, but does the commission need

33:24

to do that much extra? Really heavy

33:27

lift law making. doesn't need to be

33:29

out in front like it doesn't get

33:31

the sort of doesn't need the driving

33:33

political force that it needed to get

33:36

the grain do in status by in

33:38

I certainly they want to take on

33:40

agriculture than they were name and political

33:42

input and they are going to have

33:45

to do more to get to that

33:47

proposed target of. Ninety percent cut

33:49

by twenty forty or so. there's

33:51

work to do, but I would

33:53

say it's less than where was

33:55

the other pretty factor in all

33:58

of this which with mint. The

34:00

failure on his podcast is that

34:02

the effects of climate change the

34:05

going to get worse and they

34:07

will become politically salient. I believe

34:09

in and in. I know that

34:12

people in the Commission also view

34:14

this as a kind of terrible

34:16

stopgap. this heat waves will become

34:19

unbearable, flood school, get worse. There

34:21

is a sense that Europeans will

34:23

demand action in an increasingly further

34:26

why they will kind of overcome

34:28

some of these political. Resistance because

34:30

were saying these impacts get worse

34:33

unless unless. It's harmless. Get your and to

34:35

wrap up less, get your take on that. While I totally

34:37

agree on the and bucks point on a

34:39

he's already changed Baltics there's no doubt about

34:41

that. People are really worried and favourite to

34:43

me on the point about what this kind

34:45

of next mandate if he will has to

34:48

deliver. There is a lot of implementing legislation

34:50

that needs get done so the machine needs

34:52

to grind i think cows right in that

34:54

kind of. The big headline pieces to some

34:56

extent are in place but as ever with

34:58

legislation right the devil is in detail on

35:00

there was a lot of details get work

35:02

through so that if he be. On.

35:05

The assumption and again current polling would

35:07

suggest the Bbb will remain the largest

35:09

political blocs in the European Parliament. The

35:11

question is really where that kind of

35:13

center seat sets of think it's right?

35:15

right? right on the kind of right

35:17

hand edge of renew right now. Does

35:19

the hard right blocking in Greece and

35:21

and me that sad to see well

35:23

into the B P X address. do

35:25

they gain seats? The I mean these

35:27

are alive and questions, but I think

35:29

that the Bp is definitely gonna have

35:31

a really important role in making sure

35:33

that the parliament. Is functioning around

35:36

this set of questions given the

35:38

extent to which. Emissions.

35:40

Reductions are necessary in a

35:42

very short term. Of. This

35:44

point globally and Europe has an outsized

35:47

role because of it's soft power in

35:49

the world. But. Also, because

35:51

of their supply chain impacts that it

35:53

has around the world, Foreign policy is

35:56

Not climate policy. All of these things

35:58

are interconnected and so. I think

36:00

the stakes are pretty high because

36:02

if the next parliament takes a

36:04

lot of these issues of the

36:07

agenda and is defined by an

36:09

unwillingness to do things, then that

36:11

could cost us very dear in

36:13

essentially the five years which will

36:15

decide the fate olds, or the

36:17

difference between one off and three

36:19

degrees. I believe that that

36:21

how Matheson had breaths. Thanks so much

36:23

for being. Here and cave. Thank

36:26

you. And

36:28

will leave it there for this week as well. Make

36:32

sure you subscribe to a Confidential on your

36:34

favorite podcast platforms and please do get in

36:36

touch with your ideas and see back at

36:38

had passed Athletic of the. Thanks

36:42

to the Anus or Senior Audio

36:45

Producer and to Christina Gonzalez executive.

36:47

Producer for audio and thanks to

36:49

you for listening. And

36:52

fairly ten, and I'll soon as. Tired.

37:00

Of ads barging into your favorite

37:02

news broadcasts. Goodness Ad Free

37:04

listening is available on Amazon Music for

37:06

all the music plus top podcast included

37:09

with your prime membership. Stay. Up

37:11

to date on everything newsworthy by

37:13

downloading the Amazon Music app for

37:15

free or go to amazon.com/news ad

37:17

free. That. amazon.com/news ad free

37:19

to catch up on the

37:22

latest episodes without. The ads.