Guest election blog – Scottish National Party by Ian Carter

.

I worked as an ornithologist at Natural England for 25 years, and was closely involved in the reintroduction of Red Kites and other species recovery projects. I now spend my time watching wildlife and writing about it. My recent books include Rhythms of Nature, and I co-authored The Red Kite’s Year and The Hen Harrier’s Year with wildlife artist Dan Powell. I moved to Galloway, southern Scotland (from Devon) just over two years ago and have written a new book, Wild Galloway, about the glen where I now live, to be published by Whittles in September.

In England, I tended to vote Labour unless the Lib Dems had more chance of winning. Once, when neither of those parties could win, I voted Green. My whole adult life, living always in rural areas, I’ve been blessed with an incumbent MP whom I didn’t vote for. But maybe my luck is about to change.

These are my thoughts on the environmental aspects of the SNP’s election manifesto.

.

Things I like:

• Transport (the good bits): There is already free bus travel for over 60s and under 22s in Scotland and limits to peak rail fares. As well as a generic call for further government investment in public transport there is the suggestion that the existing public ownership of the railways should be extended to include full public control over Network Rail Scotland. That seems very sensible. 
• Coal: A ban on new licences is already a commitment of the Scottish government but the SNP wish to see this extended to the rest of the UK. An easy call to make perhaps, but a good one.
• Renewables: This almost slipped down to the ‘Missing’ heading but there is just enough to include it here. The SNP believes in significant growth for renewables through enhanced public funding, which should include an investment in the green economy of at least £28bn a year from the UK government. Changes to the electricity grid system to help boost renewables are needed and greater devolved powers would help to deliver them.
• Net zero (the good bits): A related topic and another that just scrapes into this section. It is mentioned ten times, mainly involving pleas to the UK government for greater devolved powers and more investment. Removing VAT from on-street electric vehicle charging is a rare point of detail. It’ll help, I suppose, a little. The suggestion that government should seek ‘an equity stake in future energy projects’ might help a lot more, but there is no further detail. There is an interesting line that because Scotland has two thirds of the UK’s peatland and plants 60% of our new trees, it must reach net zero by 2045 if the UK is to hit the 2050 target.
• Brexit: Aligned to the desire for an independent Scotland is the intention to push for Scotland to rejoin the EU. And while there is nothing specific about the environmental benefits, these are beyond dispute. It is unlikely to happen of course but even so… the aspiration is clearly stated and who really knows what the future will bring.
• There is an acknowledgment that we face twin crises of climate change and nature loss and a stated ‘unwavering commitment’ to tackle them. That’s a good start, but see also ‘Things that are missing’.

Things I don’t like:

• Transport (the bad bits): We expect nothing less from mainstream parties of course but, despite everything, continued growth is always a high priority and if more and better roads can help with that, so be it. The suite of name-checked road improvement schemes is one of the few places in the document where we are treated to some detail, hot on the heels of an acknowledgment that reducing road traffic is key to cutting emissions. Ah well.
• New oil and gas licences: New licences will be dealt with on a ‘case by case’ basis, with a ‘robust climate compatibility assessment’ (which already exists). So, having previously suggested there should be a presumption against new exploration, the SNP have clambered back up onto the fence and are refusing to budge. Disappointing.
• Nuclear power: The SNP really don’t like nuclear, whether that’s weapons or power stations. Instead, we are promised that the shortfall in energy can be made up from renewables, better energy storage, hydrogen and carbon capture. Is this realistic? I’m not convinced.
• Net zero (the bad bits): Despite lots of mentions, most relate to ensuring a ‘fair transition’ from fossil fuels. It’s difficult to see this as anything other than a scaling back of ambition. How else to explain the suggested lowering of VAT for the hospitality and tourism sectors for example. And see below regarding a windfall tax on oil companies. For ‘fairer’ read ‘slower’. The idea of reinvigorating investments on carbon capture sounds a little desperate.  

Things that are missing:

• Neither ‘wildlife’ nor ‘conservation’ get a mention. ‘Nature’ is referenced just once when we are told about the ‘unwavering commitment’ to tackle the nature crisis. If this is so, I’d have thought there might be a few words about it in the manifesto.
• Animal welfare: Nothing. Nothing at all. That’s a shame because the Scottish Government has recently tightened up the law on hunting with dogs and enacted legislation to ban snares and license grouse shooting. A signal to Westminster that we must all continue to make progress in these areas would have been welcome. 
• Access to the countryside: Scotland already has a right of responsible access but, again, a reaffirmation of its importance and a nudge to Westminster would not have gone amiss, especially as the rest of the UK lags so far behind.
• A windfall tax on energy? The SNP would like devolved powers for a windfall tax on ‘Scottish companies’ in part to help tackle climate change (so far so good), but this, they say, must not be a ‘raid on the north-east of Scotland’ (where the oil industry is based). If we take that to mean fossil fuel companies are not to be taxed more heavily then where will the money come from? They don’t say.
• Farming and wildlife: There must be ‘more funding’ for farmers (to pre-Brexit levels at least) and it must be ‘sustainable’. Westminster please note. And, well, that’s all there is.
• Fishing: Again, a plea for ‘more funding’, and a lament that Scotland’s share of fishing quotas has been reduced in post-Brexit trade deals, but nothing at all on the impacts of this industry on marine wildlife.
• Housing: Nothing under the environmental banner. Not a thing.
• Pollution: A passing mention of cleaner vehicles. And that’s it.

Overall assessment: This is a short manifesto at just 28 pages, many containing only a few extra-large words. It is uninspiring. It lacks detail and says almost nothing about subjects I feel passionately about, including nature conservation, pollution and animal welfare. The SNP puts up candidates only for Scottish constituencies and environmental matters are largely devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Does that excuse the lack of detail here? Perhaps a little, though it still leaves me feeling cold and unenthused.

Would I vote for these environmental policies? I moved to Scotland recently, only to find that I still had a Conservative MP (I know, really! One of only seven in Scotland in the last parliament). My vote will go to the candidate most likely to beat them, and the latest odds suggest that the SNP is best placed. I’ll be happy to vote SNP because of their moderately impressive track record in the Scottish Parliament, but it will be ‘despite’ rather than ‘because of’ this underwhelming manifesto.    

This is one of a series of opinion pieces on the political parties’ 2024 general election manifestos. They were commissioned by Wild Justice several months ago by approaching a wide variety of conservationists and environmentalists long before the date of the general election was known. Some people who originally agreed to write pieces found the date and short timescale impossible and had to back out. We did not know what they would write and their only brief was to pick one or two political parties’ election manifestos and tell us what they liked and didn’t like about their environmental policies. We didn’t tell people what to write and we haven’t edited what they wrote (except to squeeze things into a common format, to correct minor grammatical and spelling errors and typos). The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Wild Justice.