Sunak’s Net Zero speech was a pitch to bring Super Distrusters back on board

This week, the MHP Polarisation Tracker revealed that the most important dividing line in British politics is not between Left and Right, but between ‘Trusters’ and a third of UK adults who are ‘Super Distrusters’ - highly suspicious of the promise of progress and of the competence and integrity of those in charge.

In the build-up to COP26 in 2021, the Tracker found that support for government action on climate change was high and rising. But in the wake of the energy and cost-of-living crises, support has begun to decline and divide. In only a couple of years, this dynamic has dissolved the consensus around climate change and turned Net Zero into a political battleground.

While two thirds of the British public still support Net Zero as a goal, specific Net Zero policies are far less popular and Super Distrusters in particular worry that Net Zero is unaffordable and suspect that media claims about climate change are overblown.

It is this tension that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak attempted to resolve with his Downing Street speech today, as he explicitly acknowledged:

“Even the most committed advocates for Net Zero must recognise that if our solution is to force people to pay [high costs], support will simply collapse.”

At the heart of Super Distruster opposition to change is the belief that elites are motivated by ideological zeal, determined to push through their ideas without consultation or consideration for the impact on people.

The Sunak speech spoke directly to these concerns, pledging to “change the way our politics works.”

• For a Super Distruster audience angry about elite control, he promised “consent, not imposition.”
• For Super Distrusters distrustful of authority, he offered “honesty, not obfuscation.”
• And in response to the Super Distruster belief that elites are out of touch with the needs of the people, he pledged “pragmatism, not ideology.”

The speech was calibrated to the Super Distruster mindset in other ways too.

The Prime Minster’s opening line was “Let me get straight to it”, conveying a ‘no-nonsense’ approach designed to put distance between him and the ‘technocratic blob’ that many Super Distrusters loathe.

The speech continued in this vein, offering Super Distrusters a mea culpa and setting himself in opposition to ‘dishonest elites’ on behalf of the people:

But no one in politics has had the courage to look people in the eye and explain what that involves. That’s wrong – and it changes now. We’re changing our approach to meeting Net Zero to ease the burden on working people.

He went on to rule out policies that don’t actually exist, but which do loom large in the Super Distruster discourse: New taxes on meat (the most divisive environmental policy that we examined in Wave 5 of the MHP Polarisation Tracker), and aviation were ruled out.

Critics on Twitter scoffed at the idea that these were any more than Tory phantoms, but Super Distrusters point to the speed with which ULEZ was expanded in London as evidence that a climate emergency will be used to justify all sorts of new measures.

Most significantly, Sunak’s speech recognised that the Super Distruster audience he was trying to connect with are not suicidal or stupid. Rather, they have a different analysis of the problem and the best way forward.

Super Distrusters support more action on climate change and the goal of reaching Net Zero by 2050 ‘even if it means I have to make changes to my way of life'. But, their distrust of elite power means they are more resistant to demand-side reforms, such as discouraging the use of cars or banning the sale of gas boilers.

Instead, Super Distrusters want the emphasis placed on renewable energy generation - supporting measures including the expansion of onshore wind, nuclear - plus environmental stewardship. This is precisely the set of measures that he focused on.

And, as our Networked Age Guide to Communicating in a Polarised World counsels, one of the most effective ways to overcome division is to focus on a future in which innovation can eliminate polarising trade-offs. Sunak used this approach in an effort to bridge the divide, trumpeting his ‘Green Future Fellowship’ and ‘Net Zero Innovation Portfolio’ policies and paying tribute to British scientific prowess:

“So, from offshore wind, to nuclear, to a revolution in our energy infrastructure investors should have absolute confidence that we’re getting on with the job and the UK will remain the best place in the world to invest in the green industries of the future.

“Not least, because of something else this country has always excelled at: innovation in new technologies.

“As a country that emits less than 1% of the world’s carbon emissions, one of the most powerful contributions, we can make is our unique ability to develop new technologies that can help the world.”

Will this new approach help to keep the Net Zero coalition together and win back some Super Distrusters for the Tories?

Polarised positions are very hard to shift and a message is only ever as good as its messenger. With opinions hardening and Rishi’s approval ratings at rock bottom, it’s a long-shot.