Now we realize that offshoring all our industrial manufacturing, offshoring all our AI and being dependent on US, China for these things create choke points, allow us to, to be blackmailed.

I think one of the reasons that some of the consensus has begun to come apart i- is because sometimes there have been green measures that have been introduced in ways that are not wise or intelligent, and I'm thinking of the famous example of the gilets jaunes, for example, in France.

But there are similar things where people fear that people on the lowest incomes are gonna be the ones who are going to be asked to pay the most for the transition.

And it feels to me that one of the things we absolutely need to make 110% sure of is that that is not the case, both because of the morality of that position, but also because if you do that, then you certainly don't bring people with you.

So I think in order to get us closer together, I think we could listen to more citizens assemblies and to make sure that citizens assemblies on climate are genuinely representative of the communities that they're in.

So it's not just, you know, people who think like me, but a, a genuine cross-section of the public who, by and large, when they're asked these questions, actually do come together with quite bold policies, much bolder than most governments, and do kind of point the way forward.

But I, if I could just come back on one thing though, because I'm, I get so frustrated when it's kind of said, "Well, you know, the UK only accounts for 1% of, of emissions, so wh- why are we kind of so bothered?" I mean, first of all, I would agree with Rory actually, that offshoring, if, if that means also that, for example, China is the country that then has to put the emissions associated with the products that it's making for us on their account sheet, that is fundamentally wrong.

Yeah, I wanna, I wanna hear more from Caroline on this, but ju-just to say to listeners and viewers that when we interviewed Dan Jørgensen, the European Union, the Commissioner on Climate and Energy, he answered some of those points, not to Rory's total satisfaction at the time.

What do you make of that reaction to the NIMBY problem that may not be a n- green problem, but certainly is a problem?

I mean, I just think that these labels aren't terribly helpful.

I, I think it's much more helpful to talk about what kind of economy that we want and how the economy is a kind of subset of the wider environment, the planet, and, and, and not the other way around.

And so when it comes to the abundance agenda, you, you know, I'm, I'm all for, uh, abundance when it comes to, you know, hedonism and having a good time and so forth.

But if that somehow means that we just ignore the fact that there are limits to ongoing ever-increasing economic growth, then I would have deep concerns about it.

I mean, yes, of course, we all know that the economic development can be made more, um, efficient and, and it's right that it should be.

But at the end of the day, there's nowhere on Earth that has totally decoupled production from, from emissions.

Do you think the UK should get more air conditioners as a part of a deregulatory agenda?

I suspect that the fact there's going to be a GCSE in natural history, which really comes about as one of your achievements, is something you must be very proud of.

I am so excited about this, but I can't let it go without immediately mentioning Mary Colwell, because she is the person who deserves the vast majority of the credit, because it was her idea right back in 2011.

I started working with her around 2018, and...

What's exciting about this GCSE is that it's going to be the kind of GCSE where young people are going to have real access to the natural world.

They're going to be getting their fingers in the soil.

They're going to be noticing the different species and butterflies and animals and so forth on their way to school.

They're going to be immersed in the natural world.

difference in that regard?

Suella Braverman, Home Secretary in the Conservative government, speaking in Parliament.

Police shifts that could've been spent stopping robbery, violent crime, or antisocial behavior, and the cost to the taxpayer is an outrage.

I think that the measures that have been brought in are a blatant and biased attack on a really important long-standing right to protest.

The government had banned new oil and gas licenses, but it was also clear that the impact of these new laws was weighing heavily on the movement.

The chilling effect of so many of these laws meant that it became ever more risky for people to take that action.

They saw their colleagues being banged up in prison, and there are a limited number of people who have the willingness and ability to pay that kind of price.

What do you think? Is that what's happening?

I don't think that voters themselves are turning against climate action.

I would be the first to say that Reform UK and their politicians are totally illiterate when it comes to climate policy.

And, you know, you have so many multiple ironies.

For example, Richard Tice, the deputy leader of Reform, his constituency... of Skegness and Boston, is one of the most flood-prone constituencies in the whole country.

And so the idea that he would be the person championing ripping up climate protections when his own constituents are going to be absolutely in the forefront of the impacts of that If we don't have any flood protections, you know, you couldn't really make it up.

But I would make a big distinction between the leaders of reform and the voters of reform.

Well, I mean,

Rory, Caroline Lucas, um, is making a series for us on climate and national security, and, um, she's obviously listened to recent episodes, Rory, and she's got a little question for us.

Hi, Alistair.

Hi, Rory.

This is Caroline Lucas here with a question for you.

I wanted to say that I found your recent energy and climate change question time with Dan Jorgensen really, really compelling, and I thought he made some great arguments about the need for an urgent green transition.

He talked very compellingly about the need for cheaper energy, for greater energy independence, but what really struck me was his admission that politicians, including himself, have focused too much on arguments about things like price mechanisms and not enough on the reality of climate breakdown and what that really means in terms of its possible impact on national security.

He made the case that climate change is the biggest threat multiplier on the planet and that it could lead to wars and insecurity.

The impacts of this destabilization will profoundly impact every country on Earth.

And one policy change that Mark Drakeford wants to see quickly is a proportional voting system for UK-wide elections, a goal he shares with the former Green Party leader and Compass co-chair, Caroline Lucas.

[clapping] Unless we can find ways to work together and find areas where we can find common ground rather than staying solely in our own tribes and feeling very much more holy than everybody else, if, if we do that, then that is a surefire way of giving the keys to Nigel Farage next time around.

So I think it's just so incumbent upon all of us to find ways of working together more effectively.

What was your, what was your thinking?

Because Andy Burnham has a commitment to electoral reform.

That is the, the key to open up this, this kind of distorted, archaic electoral system that we have.

Now, what I'm not saying is that the Greens should be standing down left, right, and center.

We've tried that before, and it was absolutely unreciprocated.