Wetherby campaigner 'disappointed' after losing High Court climate change battle against government
A disability campaigner from Wetherby said he is “extremely disappointed” his High Court legal challenge against the Government has been thrown out, after he argued that climate change is threatening his health.
Doug Paulley, 46, has a number of health conditions that campaign group Friends of the Earth (FoE) argued are being exacerbated by rising summer temperatures, causing him distress and discomfort.
This summer, the group took a legal challenge to London over what it described as “the UK Government’s failure to protect people, property and infrastructure from the foreseeable impacts of accelerating climate change”.
FoE and the co-claimants argued that the current National Adaptation Programme (NAP), that sets out the Government’s climate goals, falls short in setting out “adaptation objectives”.
But on Friday (October 25), Mr Justice Chamberlain dismissed the claim, stating there was no “error of law”.
Following the ruling, Mr Paulley, who lives in a care home, said: “This is extremely disappointing. Yet again the Government has got away with selling disabled people down the river.”
He has an impairment that affects his nervous system and has contributed to several strokes, as well as diabetes and a heart condition.
Mr Paulley continued: “Climate breakdown threatens us all, but disabled people are disproportionately affected and are always amongst those who bear the brunt when disaster strikes.
“The lack of adequate protection in the Government’s climate adaptation plan means more disabled people will suffer and die as the impacts of climate change accelerate.
“Despite this disappointing outcome, I am delighted to have been part of this amazing collaboration between environmentalists, disabled people and excellent lawyers in the continuing fight for a safer future.”
Mr Paulley was joined by Kevin Jordan in the legal challenge, an activist who was made homeless shortly before Christmas 2023, after his house in Norfolk was demolished when coastal erosion put it in severe danger of falling into the sea.
A hearing in London was told that the NAP is required every five years under the 2008 Climate Change Act.
David Wolfe KC, for the campaigners, told the court in written submissions that the plan “perpetuated” ministers’ “history of failure in climate adaptation” and failed to respond to risks posed by high temperatures, coastal flooding, erosion and extreme weather events, and other challenges caused by changing climate conditions.
He also claimed the Government failed to consider the risks to the delivery of the policies and proposals in the NAP, resulting in the plan leaving British people, especially the vulnerable, “subject to specific threats or adverse effects of climate change on their life, health, well-being and quality of life”.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) opposed the challenge, with Mark Westmoreland Smith KC, for the department, stating in written arguments that the campaigners’ case was based on “fundamental factual errors” and was an “unfair characterisation” of the approach taken by ministers.
He said the Environment Secretary – a role currently held by Labour’s Steve Reed – had “broad discretion” over the NAP’s objectives and was “politically accountable to Parliament for them”.
Mr Westmoreland Smith said consideration of the “uncertainties” for addressing risks was “hard-wired” into NAP and “clearly taken into account” and that “factors related to delivery such as current policy status, funding, timeframes and constraints, and achievability of actions were considered throughout”.
In his ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that the Government did consider the “equality impacts” of the plan and the risks to implementing it.
He said: “The evidence establishes that delivery risk, in the sense of uncertainty in relation to whether particular proposals and policies would achieve what they set out to achieve, was considered at various stages.”
Will Rundle, head of legal at FoE, said that it would “study the detail” of the judgment before deciding whether to bid to appeal, describing the NAP as “hopelessly inadequate”.
He said: “A robust and comprehensive adaptation plan is urgently needed to help protect us from increasingly severe storms, floods and heatwaves – particularly marginalised groups, such as older and disabled people, and those living in areas most at risk from climate change.
“Labour must deliver on its pre-election pledge to improve resilience and preparation by urgently drawing up and implementing a much tougher climate adaptation programme to prepare the UK for the enormous challenges a dangerously warming planet will bring – with those most affected involved in its planning.”
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has been approached for comment. A spokesperson previously said that the Government will ensure that the UK is prepared for the changes that will be brought by climate change by improving infrastructure, enhancing flood defences and planting trees.