We can't be careless with net-zero as we are with Covid easing

Fracking is back on the political agenda (Image: Sky News)

I recently returned from a wonderful three-night stay in Milan. I had been looking forward to the trip for months but felt a little nervous weeks before I packed my suitcase. Up until 28th February, it was a legal requirement for fully vaccinated travellers from the UK to produce both proof of Covid vaccination status and a negative test. Thankfully, four days before I set foot at Bristol Airport, the latter wasn't needed. I say 'thankfully', because that would've cost me more than the return flight ticket.

Over the past two years, the Italian government has consistently introduced stricter restrictions compared to the UK. For example, I don't know how the British public would have felt they were told they had to wear an FFP2 face mask outdoors as well as indoors, the way Italians were required to. Italy only lifted that restrictions a few short weeks ago, and by 31st March, look to remove the 'state of emergency' status while in England, the pandemic has been an afterthought for some time.

It makes you wonder why Prime Minister Boris Johnson felt compelled to ease restrictions in England earlier than scheduled while everywhere else in the world sees the genuine threat Covid still poses. I share the argument that Westminster bowed to pressure from so-called 'pro-freedom' campaigners and politicians (or 'freedom fighters' as they are occasionally called) who had, for some months, protested loudly against the likes of face coverings and Covid passes. 

But I also truly feel that - and I can hear the groans already - that Brexit played a big part. Much of Europe are in no hurry to forget Covid in a hurry, and some haven't hesitated in re-introducing measures. Infection levels remain high and official researches are continuing around the impact the disease has on our organs, regardless of how mild it can be, regardless of how old you are, regardless of vaccination status and regardless of how long they're infected for. While I understand that being fully vaccinated alone is proven to reduce its severity, Covid can still threaten the lives of the vulnerable, to which there are more of than we dare to estimate. Economies, UK included, have recovered to pre-pandemic levels as people are adapting to work in a hybrid way. Yet, it seems a little too convenient for Westminster to say it's all over when we know it's far from it, especially with rising global vaccine inequality.

Yes, I'm talking anecdotally here, but with the stringent rules in Italy, I had no impression that the people of Milan were upset about having to show a pass or wear an FFP2 mask. Certainly, there have been reported pockets of protests, but that's normal. No policy is met without opposition and if there's one thing we know about Italians is that they're passionate, very passionate. I mean, when I was a spectator at an Inter Milan match over the weekend, even watching the team warm up was intense. If the pandemic restrictions proved too much - in that they didn't want to share their passes - I'd have definitely known about it during my stay in Milan. But the atmosphere in one of Italy's busiest cities was calm and bustling.

So as Italy is reacting to contentious policies in a rather uncharacteristic way, Britain, famous for keeping calm and carrying on, appears to do anything but (well, at least the Conservative government). The so-called 'pro-freedom' campaigners have shouted so loudly about how 'common sense has prevailed', they can claim victory on this particular battle, for now. So, where next for the whiners? Of course, they're against cutting global emissions!

Climate change has been a hot topic for years, but the awareness of its impact has intensified in recent months, especially now the United States is taking the environment seriously once more. With this in mind, countries all around the world signed a significant deal during COP26 in Glasgow last November, which commits them to invest in green energy, and reduce the impact of global warming. It's a commitment that should be celebrated - I mean, there's surely nothing wrong with using cleaner energy to heat homes, drive hybrid/electric cars or cycle, and focus on recycling materials?

The challenge is around affordability. Economies have taken a battering over the past 24 months as a result of the global pandemic, a supply chain shortage and Russia invading Ukraine. Fuel prices are at record levels, inflation (in the UK at least) has rocketed and people are going to feel the pinch even further from April. Should green ambitions take a back seat, at least for the meantime? There are also concerns around the cost of insulating homes and that the government should be doing more to support low-income families in the transition. While it shouldn't deter a level-headed Westminster to achieve key net-zero targets, we are talking about Boris Johnson here, who has the unique ability to bin manifesto promises. He should be investing in factories and plants that focus on generating renewable energy but instead, he's looking to reverse a ban on fracking, the drilling of shale gas and oil.

The debate on fracking in the UK has intensified over the past decade when the JR Ewing's of the world battled against angry locals who polluted their streets with the stench of oil and drilling, causing earthquakes in the process. The effects of fracking had taken its toll on the health and economy of local communities; homes lost value and harmonies disrupted. Having worked on a high profile public relations campaign on the issue, I saw for myself the devastation it had on families and agriculture, and was pleased when Johnson's own government ended its support in November 2019. But just over two years later, drilling is now seen as the solution to saving people money and source energy locally.

Sourcing energy at home should be supported, but fracking is most certainly not the answer. When we're encouraged to use less oil, the mixed messaging in trying to fix this problem will make matters worse. The answer is to stop energy companies from upping their prices by up to 54% from April. The answer is to think of other ways of investing in energy without the reliance of Russia, Saudi Arabia and China. The UK and the European Union are doing the right thing in phasing out, but time will soon be against them to find suitable alternatives. For the good of the environment, we're getting rid of coal and putting pressure on the steel industry to do more - fracking should be treated exactly the same way.

Yet, I get the impression that Johnson is listening to voices that have the interest of the very few rather than considering the nation's health for the long-term. I suppose these influencers are key to getting his ratings back to where he wants them to be, keeping the momentum going until the next general election. For him, that's fine, but he'll regret delaying progress of the honourable net-zero ambition. 

I acknowledge that the environment debate is immature right now - we've the 'net-zero deniers' against combative and reckless groups like Extinction Rebellion and Insulate Britain. And words from the likes of David Attenborough and Stanley Johnson (yes, the Prime Minister's father) don't stick because their words are perhaps a little too scary for sensitive ears, my ears are included in this. But the 'net-zero' target is a good policy, and the environment is a global issue - it's up to Johnson to choose between being a green leader, or have his hands dirty with oil.