1/ Labour should drop it; it& #39;s a goal that can& #39;t be delivered. Labour should match Hackney& #39;s target of <45% decarbonisation against 2010 levels by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2040. This matches the higher confidence threshold of the IPCC& #39;s 1.5C report. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-net-zero-target-2030-labour-climate-change-a9586971.html">https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p...

2/ I don& #39;t wish to diminish the achievements of the Labour GND people who managed to defeat the dinosaurs at Labour Conference, but the motion is a flawed exercise in tech utopianism that naively scopes-out aviation and land transport emissions, meaning it fails on its own terms.

3/ The 2030 target essentially came out of XR, which at the time was run by people like Roger Hallam (who I met at Hackney Town Hall) who are extremely anti-politics, and it& #39;s my suspicion that this target was more about showing that politics couldn& #39;t deliver than that it could.

4/ For a deeper dive into the flaws of Labour& #39;s current decarbonisation target and why it should be following the @HackneyLabour administration& #39;s lead, I& #39;ve already written a detailed thread... https://twitter.com/jonburkeUK/status/1176982853810343936">https://twitter.com/jonburkeU...

5/ For the avoidance of doubt, what I mean by "can& #39;t be delivered" is that the 2030 target can& #39;t be delivered with the level of ambition expressed in the motion it was delivered under. We could do it, but not by scoping-out aviation, land transport, and resource depletion.

6/ The fact that & #39;the architect of Labour& #39;s Green New Deal& #39; was permitted to go missing on the second Heathrow expansion vote perfectly illustrates the magical thinking going on in the Labour Party about decarbonisation. https://twitter.com/jonburkeUK/status/1206358204189495296">https://twitter.com/jonburkeU...