Appease climate change? Great idea!

Recent comments by Labour’s Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves have made it clear that the party’s previous commitment to spending £28 billion per annum on green investment is now fully ditched. This is because the ‘economic circumstances have changed’ apparently. This makes a change from saying we can’t say what we’ll do until we see the books. Rachel’s team clearly have their own crystal ball. I doubt that the economy has changed all that much since the ‘pledge’ was made. But perhaps it was only ever intended to be a headline grabbing thing at the time. I wonder. What would Winston Churchill have done in 1940, when it became clear the British economy was facing it’s toughest ever test? Well into the Phoney War, did he say ‘the economic circumstances have changed’ - so we’ll drop down a gear or two on our commitments? I imagine the appeasers around him—still hoping for an accommodation with Hitler—were whispering ‘we can’t afford this war!’
 
It’s all about the short-termism of politics of course—adequate climate change action can always be postponed. There are many ways Labour could find the dosh to fulfil this pledge, it just chooses not to. What’s going on in the real world is made startlingly clear in an article posted on Inside Climate News, which I thoroughly recommend:
 
With the World Stumbling Past 1.5 Degrees of Warming, Scientists Warn Climate Shocks Could Trigger Unrest and Authoritarian Backlash - Inside Climate News
​