Yesterday, Gordon Brown wore a green cloak. The cloak yet again of a magician. Many times the Chancellor has managed to produce a Budget or Pre-Budget report that glosses over the economic reality and highlights his particular chosen policy areas. Education was chosen again to benefit from his (our) largesse. Emphasising the importance of education will attract no criticism from me. However, his claim to have responded to the widespread concern about climate change was pretty lame. He justified his claim to being a born-again environmentalist by raising ‘green’ taxes by 0.1% of GDP. Hardly inspiring stuff. Indeed, the idea that such a small increase was going to affect real change in people’s travelling behaviour is laughable, if it was not so serious. I do accept that Britain alone addressing CO2 emissions will only make a small impact on climate change, however, taking a lead on this issue would have served to encourage our neighbours and, in particular, China to start addressing the issue now.

The problem is that climate change is not such a clear and present danger to the British. It is, however, very much one for the people of Bangladesh. Precariously perched beside the Bay of Bengal, many Bangladeshis will have to deal with the ramifications of climate change due to rising sea levels within our lifetimes. Today in the Guardian, Veena Khaleque writes eloquently on the subject. She recognises the responsibilities that Bangladesh has but argues rightly, I feel, for the international community to urgently address the consequences of climate change. Arguments still rage about the degree to which climate change is the responsibility of man’s behaviour. The responses to the Stern Report have admittedly been mixed. There appears little doubt, however, that we in the developed world, by our behaviour, have contributed to the increase in sea levels. Consequently, we have a moral duty to implement effective policies now.

Almost 90 per cent of people in Britain live in an urban environment¹. The recent increased presence of country issues in the news – fox-hunting, the BSE crisis, foot and mouth – has given the impression that Britons have a predominantly rural outlook. No doubt, most Britons like ‘escaping’ to the countryside, however, the great majority of their time is spent in towns and cities.

I bring up this topic because when the environment is discussed it always appears to be in terms of the countryside. What about urban areas? When I lived in Bayswater the close proximity of Hyde Park was invaluable. It was an oasis of breathable air, often a place of relative tranquility.

And it is not just about air and green space. A pleasant environment also involves removing the fear of crime. A good friend of mine who lives in Maida Vale cites ‘petty crime’ as his biggest daily concern. He said it with a mixture of frustration and fear. A man recently approached him and aggressively challenged him, demanding his mobile phone. Why should he have to walk to and from ‘Costcutter Corner’ thinking he might be mugged?

The Conservative Party has a predominantly rural base. That should be cherished. The wonderful British countryside should be protected. What should not be forgotten, however, is that the great majority of Britons live in cities and towns. Their environment is just as important.

I guess it comes as no surprise that senior members of the Labour government have started taking environmental issues more seriously. The polls have spoken. Today the Prime Minister is on the stump accompanied by his ‘close friend’ the Chancellor. The topic that has drawn out the ‘Big Beasts’ is the Stern Report (a review is here).

Cleverly leaked in yesterday’s papers, this report has drawn attention to the economic consequences of global warming. The consequences being economic is key. To date, the adverse effects of climate change have been presented in ‘natural’ terms: rising sea levels, extinction of species, adverse weather events, to name but a few. The Stern Report has now highlighted the financial implications of our polluting behaviour. Hence, action will now be more likely taken. The Chinese, Indians and Americans need a vibrant world economy to continue their economic advance. It is now appears proven to be in all of their long-term interests to reduce carbon emissions.

David Cameron has lead on the environment since his election as leader. He has been consistent and repeated the concerns of many. At Conference this year I went to view Al Gore’s film – whether you fully accepted the conclusions or not, the impact of that movie was unquestionable. David Cameron spoke after the film and made some good comments. It is clearly a subject that matters to him personally. And that is the difference. When I see Gordon Brown (and David Milliband) coming to the party late I am suspicious. Are they recent converts? Their party’s environmental record to date has been far from impressive. What about Mr Prescott’s Transport plan?

I am pleased that the government has started going green. I am pleased it is taking climate change seriously. I am particularly pleased that environmental policy is now at the centre of British politics. David Cameron has put it there.

Dr Liam Fox had plenty to say about this on 18 Doughty Street last night. Some thoughtful comments were made. I am convinced that we cannot avoid having a nuclear component to our energy supply in this country. Emphasis on renewables and a strong push on energy efficiency are all welcome, however, in order to avoid dependence on countries whose governance is far from ideal, we must invest in a nuclear capacity now. I am aware of the major problems associated with nuclear power – cost and waste disposal to name but two. What concerns me more is our over-reliance on regimes who could easily compromise our economy (and foreign policy) by indiscriminately turning off the tap. How strong would we be if our economy and security were not dependent on oil and gas from Russia and the Middle East? The Conservative Party is right to concentrate on developing a diverse range of energy sources. The environment matters, however, so does the long-term security of this country. Some difficult decisions are going to have to be made.

Increasing ‘Green taxation’ has to be the right way forward for Britain. In particular, increased taxation of air transport is long overdue. The travelling behaviour of average Britons has in recent years dramatically changed. I am one of those Britons. I think nothing to popping on an airplane to wherever to watch the England football team. The true cost of such behaviour is never realised by me the customer. As Steve Norris recently pointed out:

We’ve now got a generation living in France, working three days a week here, [which] thinks nothing of going to Prague for a stag night.

The party is over. Airline travel costs. The Conservatives are right to address the problem.

And to those who worry about the politics of this, I would only say this – the party that is seen to deal with difficult environmental issues with initially unpopular policies will, if effective, reap long-term electoral benefits.