Tories ‘got it wrong' when they backed 2045 net zero target, Findlay says
Scottish Tory leader Russell Findlay insisted his party is the only one 'telling the truth' on net zero – as he announced the Conservatives in Scotland would scrap the target of reaching this goal by 2045.
Tory MSPs had voted for legislation in 2019 which commits Scotland to achieving net zero by that date.
But Mr Findlay now says they had been 'wrong' to do so.
🗣️ @RussellFindlay1:
"The only just transition is an affordable transition – one that protects North Sea jobs and cuts energy bills for families and businesses.
"We would scrap the SNP's 2045 net zero target.
"It is unaffordable and unachievable." #SCC25 pic.twitter.com/MA0Pe6dtfr
— Scottish Conservatives (@ScotTories) June 14, 2025
His comments came as a new policy paper published by the party said reaching this target would result in 'unaffordable costs for struggling families across Scotland and put at risk our oil and gas industry and farmers' businesses'.
UK Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has already said the UK target of reaching net zero by 2050 – five years later than the Scottish date – is 'impossible'.
While Scottish Tories had previously backed the 2045 date, Mr Findlay told the PA news agency: 'I think yes, we did get it wrong'.
When Conservative MSPs at Holyrood supported the 2045 date, he said they had done so 'so on the basis of what was known in those moments'.
But he added: 'The situation has become clearer, it is evident to everybody watching this, to everybody in the Scottish Parliament, if they were being honest.
'Both Labour, the SNP and the rest of them would admit that the 2045 target isn't just unaffordable it's unachievable – that's the reality.
'So we're telling the truth to the Scottish public.'
Mr Findlay continued: 'We want to reach net zero fairly and quickly. We understand the climate crisis emergency but we cannot harm our own economy and force householders who are already struggling to pay the bills with yet more great costs.
'Whether it be ripping out their gas boilers and putting in costly heat pumps, or forcing them to get rid of their cars and buying very expensive electric alternatives.
'This has got to be about the balance between ensuring we reach net zero properly and speedily, but recognising that it cannot come at a crippling cost to those people out there who are having to pay for it.'
Asked later by journalists if his party was pandering to climate sceptics, Mr Findlay said they were 'absolutely not', adding the Tories were the only party 'telling the truth' on the issue.
His comments came as the Scottish Conservatives promised to give every household in Scotland a £100 discount on their energy bills – with this to be funded from money accrued from the ScotWind auction, where areas of the seabed were leased for offshore wind power projects.
The paper also said the Tories would make pylons 'an option of last resort for energy infrastructure projects' – with the party promising legislation to give people 'greater decision-making authority over local infrastructure projects' by abolishing the Scottish Government's existing energy consents union.
Speaking about the changes as he addressed the Scottish Conservative conference in Edinburgh, Mr Findlay said: 'We would scrap the SNP's 2045 net zero target. It is unaffordable and unachievable.'
He added that instead of spending money on 'SNP eco-projects', the Tories would 'use it to protect oil and gas workers' livelihoods'.
Mr Findlay continued: 'We would take £100 off every household energy bill in Scotland from the proceeds of leasing our waters to wind farms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: Swinney has no spark, no vision and no clue. If he were to quit now he'd leave no legacy ... just consequences
Reports of a plot to replace John Swinney as SNP leader prompt an obvious question: with whom? The First Minister's pitch when he took over the leadership was that he would be Mr Stability, a safe pair of hands who could move the party on from the Humza Yousaf disaster, factional disagreements over gender and independence strategy, and the never-ending police investigation. Now, there's a lot to be said for stability. After all, 'May you live in interesting times' is intended as a curse, not a blessing. But whose interests are served by Swinneyean 'stability'? Certainly not taxpayers who want to see their money spent wisely on the improvement of public services. Swinney, like his recent predecessors, is adept at raking money in and pouring it back out but the record on outcomes leaves a lot to be desired. The finance secretary who gutted funding for local government. The education secretary who tried to fix an exams disaster by downgrading the results of working-class children. The Covid recovery secretary who produced no recovery in hospitals or on high streets. The first minister who, over a long and undistinguished ministerial career, has had a hand in every calamity to issue from St Andrew's House, from the educational attainment gap to the unlawful named persons scheme, the Ferguson Marine ferries to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, the secrecy that bedevilled the Alex Salmond inquiry to the brazen deletion of ministerial messages from the Covid pandemic. Internal rivals might be displeased with his absolutely honking performance in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, losing a safe SNP seat to a Labour party that he said wasn't even in the race, but if anyone is entitled to vent about the man's performance it is the general public. They thought they were getting a political handyman, someone who would roll up his sleeves and fix the breaks, cracks, squeaks and grumbles across government. Thirteen months later, the same faults remain. Decrepitude has become the norm. Which brings us back to the 'who' question. Let's say the plotters give Swinney his jotters. Who follows him into Bute House? Stephen Flynn is a name insiders keep bringing up, and I keep advising them to put right back down. Flynn is a wide boy with a restless mouth and a smug manner and zero in the way of executive experience. He is a less qualified Humza Yousaf. Angus Robertson? Cold, aloof, and unrelatable. If Scottish elections were held only in Stockbridge and Kelvinbridge, he'd romp home, but the farther you get from a university, a Waitrose or a book festival, the further his appeal diminishes. Kate Forbes could make a decent fist of it but the green-haired brigade would sooner see Reform in government than allow a Bible-believing Christian to lead the party. Not that any of this matters, of course. The problem is the SNP itself, its failure to govern and its shifting priorities. Scotland will not flourish under Swinney. It will not flourish under Flynn or anyone else touted as a possible successor. The SNP is not a party that exists to make Scotland flourish; it exists to make Scotland independent. Yet the Nationalists are no closer today to achieving either than they were 18 years ago when they entered government. Scotland did not flourish under Alex Salmond, whose energies were directed to the SNP's raison d'etre. It was of little consolation to those who hoped for economic and social progress during those first seven years, but Salmond spoke often of independence as the necessary condition for transforming the country into a powerhouse of prosperity, innovation and fairness. Unionists could dislike his objectives and his personality while recognising that he had ambition for the country, however misguided. Scotland is still not flourishing but nor is it making much progress towards independence. Under the post-Salmond leadership of the SNP, the unholy trinity of Nicola Sturgeon, Humza Yousaf and John Swinney, the journey has not merely stalled, the destination has changed. The immediate objective is not tending, growing or marshalling the independence movement, but entrenching and expanding their own ruling caste, a self-perpetuating elite whose purpose is not social or constitutional change but the acquisition of power and status for their own sake. They are in office to be in office and every decision is taken with the maintenance of office in mind. They are embedding themselves as the new Scottish establishment, helpfully sporting yellow rather than red rosettes so they may be distinguished from the old establishment, and nothing - not the improvement of education, nor the recovery of the NHS, nor even independence - will get in their way. That establishment was on full display last week in John Swinney's mini reshuffle, an ingathering of the inconsequential, an anointing of the adequate. It's hard to be disappointed in the calibre of ministers, for how do you work up any kind of feeling towards a Tom Arthur or a Màiri McAllan? There is nothing there to oppose because there is nothing there. At the head of this committee of beige sits Swinney, the beigest man of all.. No spark, no passion, no vision, no clue. Tomorrow, the First Minister will address the Scotland 2050 conference in Edinburgh where he will urge us to reject 'another 25 years of Westminster mismanagement' and instead 'look around us at our immense potential today, and have the confidence that we can do better with the full powers of independence'. The party that proclaimed 'Scotland free by 93', and then 'Nationalist heaven in 2007', now wants its followers to believe independence will be nifty in 2050. At some point, the party faithful will have to accept that they are not being led but strung along. The SNP will not deliver a booming economy and radically improved public services to ordinary voters, and nor will it, in its current incarnation, deliver independence to those for whom the constitution comes before all else. The SNP will deliver only for the nomenklatura in whose grips it has been held for more than a decade now. That ruling elite has its priorities but they are not those of the general public nor, for the most part, of the rank and file of the independence movement. They are nationalists who put themselves before the nation. Why remove John Swinney as leader when he is the ideal figurehead of today's SNP? A man with a lanyard, indistinguishable in ideology or political purpose from all the other men and women with lanyards, no more or less likely to grow the economy, close the attainment gap, meet A&E targets or secure another referendum on independence. If Swinney were to go now, he would leave no legacy, only consequences, fashioned by his failings but borne by others. The young people denied a quality, life-changing education. The local government services cut and the people who relied upon them abandoned. The hollowed out town centres, the boarded up shops and businesses, the pervasive economic despair and societal gloom of a country where venturing beyond the major cities will bring you face to face with communities that have been given up on for so long they have given up on themselves. A first minister worthy of the office would set about tackling these social ailments, but John Swinney is not worthy of the office, and nor are any of those who would be likely to succeed him.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Comparison of political party membership numbers is cause for optimism
Some interesting facts emerged from the article by Xander Elliards in Saturday's National on the membership numbers of Scottish political parties (Reform UK claim to have 11k Scottish members, Jun 14). On adding together the quoted figures for the independence-supporting parties (SNP, Green and Alba), the total membership equals 74,093, and for the Unionist parties (Labour, Tory, Reform) 34,408. These figures may not be completely up-to-date, but even allowing for generous margins of error, they indicate that those of us who are committed enough to become independence-supporting party members are more than twice as many as those who are against. If these figures were more widely publicised it might generate some much-needed optimism. Graham Park Stirling
Channel 4
2 hours ago
- Channel 4
Starmer announces full national inquiry into grooming gangs
The Prime Minister has announced a full national inquiry into grooming gangs. Keir Starmer said it was after reading a review by Baroness Louise Casey. But it's a significant u-turn from his position earlier in the year, when he resisted pressure from the Conservatives, Reform and even Elon Musk
