The government has big plans for the green economy. There are targets galore: 2m skilled jobs by 2030, sale of petrol and diesel cars to be phased out by 2035, a net zero carbon economy by 2050.
Having been the birthplace of the first industrial revolution in the 18th century, the idea is that the UK can again lead the way in the next phase of technological development. There is a 10-point plan for a green industrial revolution as a statement of intent.
All of which sounds mightily impressive. The problem is the claims of global leadership don’t tally with the hard data. Turnover in the low-carbon and renewable energy sector was the same in 2020 as in 2014. The number of people employed has actually fallen by 28,000 to just over 200,000.
To take a specific example, at the last count there were just over 10,000 people working in the booming offshore wind sector. Unlike oil and gas rigs, nobody works full-time on the turbines and their manufacture has been outsourced to other countries. It is the same story in solar, where employment has dropped by 4,300 or more than 40%.
To be clear, the lack of tangible progress is not due to the pandemic, because jobs and turnover – according to the latest data from the Office for National Statistics – were both flatlining even before the arrival of Covid-19.
There are those who think the picture is brighter than the ONS figures suggest. Venture capital, they say, is alert to the opportunities to make money out of greening the economy and investment in new businesses is expanding fast.
Even if the optimists are right, there is a long way to go. The problem could be a lack of commercially viable ideas, a lack of finance, a lack of government investment – or a combination of all three. But Frances O’Grady, the TUC’s general secretary, is right when she says Britain risks losing out to countries that modernise faster. There is a yawning gap between rhetoric and reality.
What’s the point of the G20 if it can’t solve the debt crisis?
Debt relief for the world’s poorest countries is way down the list of priorities for finance ministers and central bank governors from the G20 at the meeting chaired by Indonesia. While that’s unsurprising at a time of soaring energy prices, rising inflation and supply bottlenecks, it is also shortsighted.
The membership of the G20 includes the biggest developed and developing countries, and in the early stages of the pandemic it took steps to help the poorest nations. Debt repayments were suspended and a mechanism – the common framework – was created to provide longer-term relief.
Results have been disappointing. Some creditors refused to take part in the temporary debt-suspension initiative, which has now expired. Three countries – Chad, Zambia and Ethiopia – have signed up for help through the common framework but none has yet received any assistance.
Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund says 60% of low-income countries are in debt distress or at high risk of it. The World Bank calculates debt repayments from 74 low-income countries will be $35bn (£26bn) this year – double the total in 2020.
This is a debt crisis waiting to happen and decisive action from the G20 could still avert it. Debt relief needs to be swifter and it needs to be more generous. A workable scheme can’t just involve sovereign creditors: the G20 should insist the private sector takes part on the same terms.
The credibility of the G20 is at stake here. Its critics say, with justification, that meetings have become global talking shops where participants indulge in virtue signalling and point scoring but achieve next to nothing. If the G20 can’t deliver a workable solution to the debts of low-income countries there really is no point to it.
All’s fair on love and war for Amazon and Visa
Although the details are scanty, peace has broken out in the credit card charges war between Amazon and Visa, as was always going to be the case. The online retail giant was never going to stop its UK customers paying with Visa but bridled at what it considered too steep an increase in transaction fees for both credit and debit cards. In order to secure lower transaction fees, Amazon had to say that it was prepared to go nuclear. The fact that neither side is saying much about the deal suggests both are relatively happy with the outcome.
