Deficiencies in Jersey's Carbon Neutral Roadmap.

In a recent letter to the JEP, Daniel Ray‑Marks argues that Jersey’s declaration of a “climate emergency” has led to policies that prioritise symbolism over practicality. He accepts that climate change is real but questions whether framing it as a permanent emergency is leading to cost‑effective, well‑considered decisions.

He highlights Bill Gates’s call for a global shift toward focusing on human welfare, affordability and innovation rather than rigid emissions targets — a message he believes Jersey should heed, given the Island’s negligible impact on global temperatures but significant ability to affect local living costs.

I would highlight that the charging infrastructure and details of how off-street parking in town can access electric charges is grossly deficient. Use of electric cars and charging points is completely non-joined up, except for occasional - and symbolic - mention of a few new paltry public charging points.

We must stop seeing climate policy as a blank cheque
From Daniel Ray-Marks.

JERSEY declared a "climate emergency" in May 2019, which prompted the creation of the Carbon Neutral Roadmap. More than six years on, I question whether that framing is helping us deliver the best outcomes?

Climate change is not under dispute. What I question is whether presenting this as a permanent "emergency" is helping us make sensible, cost-effective decisions.

Ahead of COP30, Bill Gates called for a shift in the global climate debate - away from a fixation on emissions targets, and towards human welfare, affordability and innovation.

That should ring loudly here. Nothing Jersey does will change global temperatures. But everything we do can alter our cost of living, business viability and household bills.

We have imported net-zero building expectations into a market already struggling with construction inflation. Yet the roadmap acknowledges that the cost to homes and businesses of replacing thou-sands of boilers has not even been analysed.

It also acknowledges that decarbonisation must be 'balanced with affordability. Yet we are pressing ahead with costly-transitions before answering that question: can ordinary people afford it?

The same document states that to meet net-zero targets, Jersey "needs to phase out the' use of all petrol and diesel vehicles from the Island's roads by 2050", and that government policy is to "end the importation and registration of petrol and diesel vehicles that are new to the Island from 2030". That is a huge economic and cultural shift in a car-dependent island. 

In the government's recent Electric Vehicle Purchase Incentive survey, Islanders reported "gaps" in public charging, and problems with cost, availability and capacity worse, this is repeating feedback given the previous year. We are pushing people towards electrification while failing to the infrastructure deficiencies already identified by users.

If we are serious about reducing car emissions, then we must make alternatives viable: frequent, affordable public transport to all parts of the Island; safe walkable routes; and a better-connected cycle network If we genuinely want to reduce congestion, then getting children safely cycling to school should be an obvious priority — yet at many schools this is not possible without mixing with heavy commuter traffic at some stage in their journey. .

We need to stop treating climate policy as a blank charge, justified by the word “emergency”, T challenge is real — but it is not improved by expensive symbolic action that delivers negligible benefit in return.