Government can’t hide behind Tories on lack of climate adaptation action

30 April 2025

The last Labour government was a pioneer of climate change legislation. But the Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) recent adaptation progress report suggests that this one seems to be drifting in its commitment to practical implementation of policy, writes CIWEM director of policy Alastair Chisholm

The Climate Change Committee’s latest Progress in adapting to climate change: 2025 report to Parliament was “blistering”. Government was reportedly “putting people, the economy and the environment in increasing peril by failing to act”. On the report’s overall picture, Adaptation Sub-Committee Chair, Baroness Brown said “I don’t think it will come as a surprise to people, this is not good news”.

No surprise because this has been the case in every progress report published since the Climate Change Act passed in 2008. The CCC has not been listened to. I know, because I have written (borderline ranted) about this each and every time, and when the CCC have provided their latest dismal assessment of the effectiveness of the National Adaptation Programme (NAP).

Farming, nature, key infrastructure, water supplies, all in a position of increasing exposure to the impacts of climate change. Homes and businesses at risk of flooding and overheating. Heat related deaths – already massively higher than from any other UK weather-related fatalities – projected to multiply several times. And in something which one would hope should resonate with the growth-above-all-else obsessed upper echelons of Government, climate change could cost seven per cent of economic output by 2050.

And yet. Whilst ministers can state until they’re blue in the face that they inherited a substandard set of circumstances from previous Conservative governments – as in relation to the condition of flood defences in a recent BBC exposé – their current policy activity (or lack of it) suggests this version of Labour has a rather more indifferent perspective on climate adaptation than its predecessor. As Brown said, “we’re seeing no increase in action”. Here’s just a couple of examples from core areas of CIWEM’s activity:

Drought resilience

Whilst the government has placed great stock on fast-tracking new reservoirs to ensure more resilient future water supplies, it is well-aware (because its own Environment Agency has been clear on where water will have to come from) of the importance of water efficiency in the scheme of things.

Whilst there are many measures in the latest round of water company investment to improve efficiency and a forthcoming £100 million Ofwat national water efficiency fund, the measure that really ensures new housing performs to a given standard are the building regulations.

New Labour introduced the Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) in 2006. It fed into a progressive ratcheting-up of the building regulations over time. Its upper tiers, 5 and 6, required a consumption rate of no more than 80 litres per person per day. The Code was scrapped in 2015.

Now in water scarce parts of the country these kinds of consumption levels are being needed to enable development to take place with confidence of a reliable resource of water. Credit schemes involving water efficiency retrofit programmes to existing homes are needed in Cambridge to enable new housebuilding.

The last government was readying consultation on enhancement to the building regulations’ Part G including to bring in more ambitious water efficiency standards. Alongside this, a water efficiency labelling scheme was committed to, to provide product market alignment. Now there is no evidence of movement on either. Nearly twenty years further into the climate crisis from when the CSH was launched.

Flood resilience

I’ve written enough about sustainable drainage (SuDS) and Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010. The confirmation by the last government that it intended to finally implement Schedule 3 of the last piece of legislation passed by the last Labour government was widely welcomed. Because of the wide-ranging benefits to surface water flood risk, water quality, amenity, urban heat island mitigation, nature and more.

Now seemingly not a week passes without written parliamentary questions on SuDS implementation being met with blandishments saying Government is assessing options for delivery and it hasn’t decided on planning-led or Schedule 3. New standards are expected one way or another, to replace the current non-statutory insult.

That won’t change the reality of an adversarial planning system where developers frequently appeal planning conditions over drainage design, costing public money, development delay and resulting in elevated flood risk to new development residents. The “bulldozing the blockers” to housing delivery dogma seems wilfully ignorant of on-the-ground reality. There may be other more streamlined rules-based mechanisms but National Planning Policy Framework plus updated standards won’t work.

Climate Change Act

Back to the start and that global leadership. The Climate Change Act 2008 was World-leading, orchestrated by the now Secretary of State for Energy and Net Zero, back when he was Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.

The Act’s Part 4 set out a whole approach to understanding, reporting, and strategically programming a wide-ranging adaptation response to climate change impacts. Part of which is the CCC’s progress report.

Labour’s 2024 election manifesto stated: “Preparing for the future not only means tackling the climate and nature emergencies, but also adapting to the changes they will bring to our environment… Labour will improve resilience and preparation across central government, local authorities, local communities, and emergency services.”

Yet there are no signs of any beefed-up approach to the adaptation programme within Defra, and widespread concerns over potential cuts to future flood defence budgets and the impacts these might have economically and on communities.

Resilient growth opportunity

Labour has a proud heritage on climate leadership and on putting in place national mechanisms to drive forward resilience. There’s no doubt the inheritance of water infrastructure challenges this government now has to grapple with is a major headache. But it can’t keep blaming the Tories.

That line is already getting tired and enough months have passed for measures teed up in recent years, which align with previous Labour vision and foresight, could have been set in train since last summer’s election. They could have compellingly answered some of the questions posed by the CCC’s damning analysis.

Ministers now have the perfect chance to say they’ve heard what their statutory advisers have said and are taking decisive action, whilst legitimately standing beside their growth ambitions. Here’s hoping they take it.

Alastair Chisholm recently featured in a BBC Radio 4 - File on 4 programme: "Hell and High Water: Are we ready for the floods?" Listen to it here.

Alastair Chisholm is director of policy at CIWEM