From Climate Emergency to Climate Resilience: Austen Moore North Lynn Borough Councillor

At the recent Borough Council of West Norfolk Full Council meeting, I proposed a motion to replace the Council's 2021 Climate Emergency declaration with a Practical Environmental and Resilience Strategy.

Although the motion was not supported by a majority of councillors, I believe the debate raised an important question that will only become more relevant in the years ahead: Where should local councils focus their time, money and resources?

My argument was never that we should stop caring about our environment. Quite the opposite. It was that local government has a responsibility to focus on the areas where it can make the greatest practical difference for local people.

Why do I think the Practical Environmental and Resilience Strategy Motion failed?

One lesson I have learned from many years in the private sector is that successful organisations must be prepared to adapt when circumstances change. Businesses that fail to recognise changing trends or continue to follow yesterday's priorities rarely succeed for long. Large organisations, including councils and governments, inevitably take longer to change direction because decisions involve many people, lengthy processes and competing priorities. That is understandable, but it also means that new ideas are often debated long before they become accepted policy. I believe that is what is happening with climate resilience. I believe that local government should be ready to embrace the conversation rather than wait for it to become conventional wisdom.

Also, one of the challenges in modern politics is that ideas are sometimes judged first by who proposes them, rather than on their own merits. That is true across the political spectrum and at every level of government. Local democracy works best when we are willing to examine proposals objectively, challenge them where necessary, and support them if they offer practical benefits for residents, regardless of which political group brings them forward. I hope this motion will continue to be judged on its arguments rather than its origin, because resilience is an issue that affects every resident of West Norfolk, irrespective of politics. Research and guidance on local government emphasise that effective scrutiny is strongest when it is collaborative and focused on the substance of proposals rather than party advantage.

A wider debate is beginning

The day after my motion was debated, another councillor shared an article from New Scientist highlighting a growing discussion among scientists and policymakers following Europe's recent heatwave.

The article argues that, while reducing global greenhouse gas emissions remains important, increasing attention must also be given to helping communities adapt to a changing climate. As extreme weather events become more frequent, there is growing recognition that governments at every level need to invest in practical measures that make towns and cities more resilient. This reflects a wider discussion taking place across Europe about balancing emissions reduction with adaptation and resilience.

These measures include improving flood protection, adapting infrastructure to cope with extreme weather, protecting vulnerable people during heatwaves, strengthening water management, and ensuring communities are better prepared for climate related risks.

This reflects the central principle behind my motion to Full Council. My proposal was not to abandon environmental responsibility, but to rebalance our priorities towards practical measures that deliver direct benefits for the people of West Norfolk. Whether discussing flood resilience, coastal protection, or safeguarding local infrastructure, local authorities are uniquely placed to take action in areas where they can make a tangible difference.

Whether people agreed with my motion or not, I believe this conversation is only just beginning. For that reason, I wanted to publish both the motion itself and the speech I delivered, so that residents can judge the arguments for themselves and decide whether West Norfolk's environmental priorities should place greater emphasis on resilience in the years ahead.

My speech at Full Council

I have proposed this motion because I believe it asks a simple but important question.

What is the primary responsibility of this Council?

Our first duty is to spend local taxpayers' money where it will deliver the greatest benefit for the people of West Norfolk. Every decision we make should be judged against that principle.

In 2021, this Council declared a Climate Emergency. Five years later, we should ask whether that declaration has led us to focus on the areas where we can make the greatest difference.

Climate change is a global challenge, but we must also be honest about the scale of our influence. The United Kingdom produces less than one percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, and our borough contributes only a tiny fraction of that figure. Even if King'

s Lynn and West Norfolk reduced its emissions to zero tomorrow, it would have no measurable impact on the global climate.

If the world is to achieve meaningful reductions in global emissions, the greatest reductions will need to come from the world's largest emitters. Countries such as China account for around thirty percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. Their actions will have a far greater influence on future climate than those of any borough council in Britain.

Some colleagues have suggested that we should pursue both emissions reduction and resilience. If unlimited resources were available, I might agree. But they are not. Every pound can only be spent once. Every additional pound spent on reducing our already tiny contribution to global emissions is a pound that cannot be invested in flood defences, coastal protection, drainage improvements, water management, or protecting our communities from the consequences of a changing climate.

The question is not whether we should spend money. The question is where that money will achieve the greatest benefit for our residents.

That is why this motion proposes ending the Climate Emergency declaration and replacing it with a Practical Environmental and Resilience Strategy. The declaration is more than just words. It establishes the framework through which priorities are set and resources are allocated. If we retain the declaration while simply adding resilience alongside it, we are asking officers to pursue two competing priorities with the same finite budget. In practice, that risks continuing exactly the approach this motion seeks to change.

This motion does not reduce our commitment to the environment. It changes our priorities. It places greater emphasis on the things this Council can genuinely influence, including flood protection, coastal resilience, water management, protecting agricultural land, preserving wildlife habitats, and helping our communities adapt to changing weather.

If we genuinely believe the climate is changing, then surely our first responsibility is to ensure that West Norfolk is ready for those changes.

We must also recognise the impact of current policies on our residents. Many families are struggling with rising energy bills and the wider cost of living. Environmental policy should improve people's lives, not make them harder.

We cannot control the climate from West Norfolk. But we can control how well West Norfolk is prepared for it. That is the responsibility of this Council, and that is what this motion seeks to achieve. I therefore ask Members to support it.

The Motion

Replace the Climate Emergency Declaration with a Practical Environmental and Resilience Strategy

This Council notes that the Climate Emergency declared in 2021 has not delivered clear or practical outcomes for residents. The UK produces approximately 1% of global CO2 emissions, and King's Lynn and West Norfolk contribute a tiny fraction of that total. Reducing our limited share alone will not meaningfully alter global climate trends, but the costs of rapid transition policies are already placing significant strain on local households.

Many of the most vulnerable residents are facing rising energy bills, fuel poverty, and financial hardship linked to policies that increase the cost of heating, transport, and daily living. No local environmental strategy should make life harder for those already struggling or force people into choosing between heating and eating.

This Council believes that practical environmental action should focus on improving local resilience and protecting our area from real risks such as flooding, coastal erosion, drainage pressures, water scarcity, and loss of agricultural land and wildlife habitats. The planning system considers environmental issues on a case by case basis, but there is no dedicated local process that assesses the wider environmental pressures created by long term population growth, including increased demand for land, housing, energy, water, and infrastructure.

This Council resolves to:

• End the 2021 Climate Emergency declaration.

• Replace it with a Practical Environmental and Resilience Strategy focused on flood defence, water management, land protection, and locally beneficial environmental measures.

• Ensure future policies protect vulnerable residents from increased living costs.

• Provide annual updates on measurable local resilience improvements rather than symbolic targets.