Humza Yousaf must learn from Rishi Sunak and come clean about unachievable climate plans – John McLellan

Humza Yousaf may rail against ‘climate deniers’ but voters will eventually call out reality deniers too

To the surprise of absolutely no one, on Sunday Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie told BBC Scotlandhe would not condemn climate activists who break the law. It’s an interesting position for a government minister who we must assume expects us to obey the laws he passes.

Presumably his tolerance of students or pensioners throwing orange paint or powder at office fronts or during sports fixtures does not extend to damaging low-emission zone cameras ─ the Metropolitan Police recorded 288 such incidents at the start of August ─ but it’s another thing for a minister to tacitly approve action which disrupts essential journeys and emergency services. A YouGov poll last month showed that over two-thirds of the UK population disapprove of protests like Just Stop Oil, and climate change came fourth in the list of concerns behind the economy, health and immigration. While the public recognises its importance ─ and as it’s rammed down their throats by an evangelising BBC every night, no wonder ─ it’s not translating into a readiness to don the hair shirt of sacrifice advocated by Mr Harvie and his followers while the cost of living continues to rise.

Initial polling shows Rishi Sunak’s decision to delay implementation of a raft of net-zero policies, including the plan to ban the sale of new fossil-fuelled vehicles from 2030, has made no difference to perceptions of either the Prime Minster or the Conservatives, but I’d wager the vast majority would support the principle of the new approach if they realised the costs involved, particularly of higher home heating and insulation standards needed to hit net-zero targets.

It’s also why the opposition is treading a careful line between attacking the government and supporting policies they know from the Uxbridge by-election are vote losers. Going on the offensive about scrapping HS2 is easy because no one likes the idea of wasting billions already spent, but voters don’t necessarily make a direct association between their pockets and the billions more it will cost. Telling them they must rip out their gas boilers, buy a heat pump, change all the windows and buy an electric car, all in the next seven years is a different matter.

Never mind glib soundbites like Humza Yousaf’s call for “climate leaders, not climate deniers”, voters will eventually call out reality deniers too. For example, the Scottish Government’s heat-in-buildings strategy requires one million gas-heated homes to convert by 2030 but doesn’t say how and the offer of grants up to £7,500 won’t cover the cost, even if it’s feasible. Nor does the strategy explain how pre-war homes ─ a third of the total stock ─ can be fitted with the necessary quality of insulation or estimate the total cost.

How many homeowners realise the terms of the SNP-Green Bute House agreement require all houses to be upgraded by 2033, or how much it will cost them? There’s no information in the strategy, published two months after the Bute House deal, and nothing in this month’s Programme for Government. As neither Mr Yousaf nor Mr Harvie has levelled with Scottish homeowners that their policies mean compulsory expenditure of thousands of pounds or their properties rendered unsellable, who are the deniers?

It's the same story with electric vehicles, and for all the angry rhetoric about pandering to populism, the UK decision to push back the ban on new petrol and diesel cars to 2035 is a get-out-of-jail-free card for the Scottish Government which has not properly addressed the practicalities involved. As of July, there were 312 charging points in Edinburgh, but only 72 in Midlothian and just 26 in East Renfrewshire, and for flat dwellers going electric is almost impossible unless they are lucky enough to have a charging point at work.

It took decades for the network of service stations to evolve as car ownership expanded, but arbitrary political targets helped boost demand for vehicles which the supply of power hasn’t matched, and the 2030 guillotine on new petrol and diesel presumed widespread availability of fast charging. Yet petrol car sales are defiantly 13 per cent up in the year to date, according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, presumably because the speed and certainty of filling up a tankful of petrol remains more efficient than standing around at a charging point, if one is available and functional. And word is out that you don’t get anything like the advertised range on a full charge because everything you switch on uses up power, and a 50-mile trip can easily use up 100 miles-worth of juice.

Electric car sales also illustrate the level of public investment needed; demand is being driven by the generous tax-breaks available for electric company cars, or for self-employed people who can write off the entire value of a new all-electric vehicle against tax. That’s partly why, as the now less-than-proud owners of a VW ID4, we are not fizzing at Mr Sunak’s decision because the plan to phase out fossil fuelled vehicles after 2030 was part of our thinking ─ having been forced to abandon our plan to run our 2014 diesel VW into the ground by Edinburgh and Glasgow’s low-emission zones ─ in the expectation that a petrol or diesel car would be a lot harder to sell in seven years’ time.

Electric is fine if you have a driveway, or if you’re prepared to swallow the extra expense for the convenience of having your own charging point and never have to visit a petrol station. It’s also fine if you never have to drive long distances. But for thousands of directly employed or retired people, it’s not fine at all. Of course, the Green aim is for people to give up cars altogether, and it will not trouble them in the slightest if property values are wrecked by imposing impossible heating and insulation standards on thousands of homes. It’s time for Mr Yousaf to come clean.