Inquiry · Opened 23 September 2025
The Seventh Carbon Budget
From: Environmental Audit Committee
What this inquiry is asking
Does the government's pathway to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 535 MtCO₂e by 2038–2042 (the Seventh Carbon Budget) represent a credible, deliverable plan? The inquiry examines whether individual sectors—energy, transport, heating, aviation, industry, agriculture—can realistically hit their targets, whether government policies are actually aligned with the budget's assumptions, and whether public behaviour change can occur at the scale required.
Status / emerging findings
- CCC's 535 MtCO₂e advice is technically credible but depends on government delivery of policies not yet in place; only 61% of carbon budget 6 emissions are currently covered by firm final policies, indicating growing delivery risk.
- Behaviour change assumptions may be overstated: public understanding of high-impact actions is poor (confusing recycling with heating/transport), and government policy inconsistency on EVs, heat pumps, and solar feeds undermines public confidence.
- Aviation decarbonisation plan is underdeveloped: relies on 54% demand restraint (capped at 10% growth vs 45% baseline) plus unproven sustainable aviation fuel scaling (CCC assumes 28% SAF by 2050; industry argues 70% is needed); no explicit mechanism to prevent aviation expansion.
- Energy system barriers are structural: grid connection queues already contain 2× the capacity needed by 2050, heat networks remain at 3% penetration despite decades of policy, and electricity-to-gas price ratio remains uncompetitive for heat pump uptake.
- Industrial decarbonisation facing investment crisis: UK steel imports at 70% of demand; electrification timelines (mid-2030s) conflict with grid connection queues; electricity prices 25% higher than France undermine business case.
Why it matters
The Seventh Carbon Budget is legally binding and Parliament's approval is required; failure to deliver it breaks the UK's net-zero-by-2050 commitment and risks international credibility on climate, but current evidence suggests government has not assembled the policy machinery or investment to hit targets.
Tone arc
Inquiry opened procedurally optimistic about CCC's technical credibility but shifted sharply critical after sectoral evidence (December 2025 onward): witnesses revealed widening gaps between budget assumptions and government policy implementation, with behavioural change and technology deployment timelines called unrealistic.
Themes
Key witnesses
Nigel Topping (Climate Change Committee chair), Emma Pinchbeck (Climate Change Committee), Professor Michael Grubb (UCL), Mike Childs (Friends of the Earth), Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh (University of Bath), Gareth Stace (UK Steel), Tanya Sinclair (Electric Vehicles UK), Caroline Bragg (ADE)
Reports & Government Responses
Report · 4 March 2026 · HC 1327
Witness sessions
Oral evidence · 12 November 2025 · HC 1327
Session 1 of 7Oral evidence · 12 November 2025 · HC 1327
Session 2 of 7Oral evidence · 3 December 2025 · HC 1327
Session 3 of 7Oral evidence · 3 December 2025 · HC 1327
Session 4 of 7Oral evidence · 3 December 2025 · HC 1327
Session 5 of 7Oral evidence · 7 January 2026 · HC 1327
Session 6 of 7Oral evidence · 7 January 2026 · HC 1327
Session 7 of 7
Written evidence & correspondence
Correspondence · 11 February 2026
Correspondence · 11 February 2026
Correspondence · 12 November 2025
Themes & actors
Topics across publication summaries
Top organisations & named entities
- Climate Change Committee·3 references
- Environmental Audit Committee·3 references
- Toby Perkins MP·2 references
- Nigel Topping CMG·1 reference
- Emma Pinchbeck·1 reference
- UK Parliament·1 reference
- Ed Miliband MP·1 reference
- Katie White OBE MP·1 reference
- Department for Energy Security and Net Zero·1 reference
- Ed Miliband·1 reference
Source · parliament.uk inquiry record ↗