Government should pull the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) (Extension to Maritime Activities) Order 2026

Tomorrow the House of Commons will vote in a deferred division on the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) (Extension to Maritime Activities) Order 2026.

Last week the regulations were debated for just 47 minutes in a committee of less than 20 MPs.

The regulations passed but depended entirely on Labour votes in doing so and when they subsequently went to the floor of the house the motion that they pass was opposed, resulting in a vote of all Members of Parliament that will take place between 11.30 am and 2 pm tomorrow Wednesday 11 February.

The regulations extend the application of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme, a government delivery mechanism for its Net Zero goal, to the maritime sector. Under the scheme those operating ships over 5000 gross tonnes will be required to get an “emissions monitoring plan” from the UK Emissions Trading Scheme Authority. This document will specify the actions that the operator must take to measure and independently verify their emissions, reporting these each year to the ETS Authority. They will then be required to buy an allowance to cover this emissions level, paying what is effectively a new carbon tax.

There are a number of issues that make these regulations particularly problematic.

First, in pursuing its Net Zero goal, the Government needs to take the public with it which means targeting carbon emission reductions on particular sectors of the economy in a way that makes sense and is mindful of the scale of their emissions in relation to those of the rest of the economy. Maritime transport is currently the most carbon-efficient mode of mass freight transport and domestic maritime emissions account for only 1% of total UK emissions so it is not an obvious place to target.

Second, and much more importantly, pursuing shipping is in any event premature because there are currently no viable fuel alternatives. The only available options cost four to five times more than conventional fuels and UK ports don’t yet have the shore-side electricity infrastructure that might one day power electric ships. If the Government wishes to intervene in the market, disincentivising the use of some fuels is pointless unless this is related to the prior provision of a viable alternative.

Third, there is not even a government commitment to using the money paid by the industry to buy the carbon emission allowances for the development of alternative fuel sources to advance decarbonisation. The money will simply go to the Treasury where it could be spent on anything.

Fourth, these regulations cannot but result in significant price increases for the customer. While polling suggests continued public support for addressing carbon emissions, it demonstrates far greater public concern in relation to the cost of living.

Fifth, these demanding regulations, were only published on 13 January, and yet they are to come into force on 1st July, just a few months away, providing the industry very little time to prepare for changes that will have a significant impact on their profit margins.

Sixth, these regulations show a complete disregard for belonging and what it means to be a citizen of a country that, while embracing a large land mass upon which a majority of its citizens reside, also includes multiple islands that are home to a not insignificant number of other UK citizens, the largest being Northern Ireland which accounts for nearly two million people. While there are, of course, physical differences between different parts of a country which mean that living within it is not a monochrome identikit experience, (and positive differences and distinctives can be drawn out by the provision of devolved government), the capacity of a polity to endure as a whole depends upon the provision and protection of a core indivisible citizenship. This must be guarded by central government to ensure that the state-wide legal changes that it seeks do not create additional manmade differences when doing so is the occasion for visiting the people of one part of the country with a particular disadvantage.

The Government’s response is problematic because, while it seems to get the importance of belonging as it relates to Scotland, perhaps because 37 Labour MPs represent Scottish seats, such that the legislation does not apply the tax to relevant shipping servicing the Scottish Islands, this approach does not extend elsewhere. Most strikingly it is applying the tax to 50% of emissions on Northern Ireland routes when we depend on ferries coming from Great Britain every day to not only move people from one part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to another but also to service our supply chains. This is particularly unfair on Northern Ireland because we are already suffering from the economic dislocation of being alienated from our main provider of goods and raw materials by the imposition of an international customs and SPS border through the Windsor Framework. If the new carbon tax can be waived completely for Scotland, then it should be waived in relation to all shipping movements for the purpose of sustaining the connections that uphold our United Kingdom.

Of huge concern to Northern Ireland, the minister sought to justify the application of the tax to NI routes at the 50% rate on the basis that this parallels the fact that shipping movements into the EU are already taxed on 50% of emissions and so this applies to ships moving from Great Britain to the Republic of Ireland. In this context, far from being reasonable, the Government’s decision to treat Northern Ireland routes the same as routes to another country is deeply disturbing. Bizarrely, residents of the Isle of Wight are to be treated worse than a foreign country and have 100% of their emissions taxed.

The Government should withdraw these regulations immediately and only bring them back when the alternative fuel sources are ready and on a basis that honours all UK citizens equally regardless of whether they live in part of the United Kingdom that depends on intra-UK marine transport or not. They must remember their obligation in the context of sustainable development to have regard both for the impact of their policies on the natural environment and on the social environment of our United Kingdom.

If they do not, then I would encourage all Members to vote against these regulations on 11 February.