B.2 Rationale

Assembly members' discussions prior to the vote shed light on the rationale behind their decisons, as do comments from their ballot papers. The results of the votes (reported above) show assembly members' final decisions.

B.2.1 In general

Assembly members began by discussing ways in which their thoughts and feelings about how to get to net zero in general had or hadn't changed, and why.

Ways in which thoughts and feelings had changed, and why

We have divided assembly members' comments into ten overlapping categories to make them easier to navigate.

A wake-up call

Some assembly members said that Covid-19 "has been a bit of a wake-up call – we'd got complacent that bad things don't happen." Thoughts included:

• "[I] realise it's much more important [now] – this catastrophe is easier to deal with than climate change."
• "Learnt that delay is dangerous – it will hurt us if we do not act."
• "Covid-19 has shown the old ways of thinking and doing things are not going to work anymore, and this has been a wake-up call that how we've been living isn't sustainable."
• "Believe even more strongly that we need to do something and not be unprepared for the climate crisis."
• "Seeing how excited people have been about wildlife popping up in different places / dolphins in Venice – … maybe this is a way of encouraging people to make the changes needed."
• "More obvious to me how much the environment is affected by emissions e.g. clear blue skies we've had. Even the clouds are brighter. The lack of traffic and cars."
• "Challenge to climate change deniers because climate change is usually invisible – but has now been made visible. So [we] need to carry on some of the changes."

An opportunity for change

Some assembly members talked about a sense of opportunity. Some assembly members made general observations saying "it's a great opportunity to grasp the nettle" or "it's an opportunity to shift." Comments included:

• "The world is going to be completely different, we just have to adapt and adjust – we cannot accept normal being as it was – this is an opportunity."
• "Covid-19 is an opportunity to start things in a completely different way, a fresh start, rather than going back to the way we've been operating before."
• "It's an opportunity for Government to move forward faster. Young people are talking about our environment; they are affected and they can see the difference. Mustn't go back to the way we were. Grasp the opportunity, take the good out of the bad. Keep people onside and bring them with you."
• "This is an opportunity to continue on with massive investment…. Introduce a climate emergency department that works closely with industry to develop new technologies/approaches."
• "Feasibility of large infrastructure has increased."
• "Chance to redevelop the social structure in an environmentally friendly way."
• "Opportunities to 'nudge' behaviour."
• "We can incorporate green changes into our recovery from coronavirus. It doesn't necessarily require grand investments. Making small changes in our homes will be easier than changing the way we travel. Feel we should be making gradual steps anyway. The door has opened to this."
• "Shows how quickly change can be implemented if there's a will. Has given hope that we can make quick changes. Feels like it might be possible to achieve net zero. Has made me feel more positive."
• "Are [we] seeing the first shoots of a possible future world."

Others said that "significant change seems more likely" or that "totally unexpected things can happen."

What government can do

Some assembly members reported changed views about what government can do:

• "Much more is possible now than what I had thought beforehand because it's shown that things can be done. Just seeing what the government has agreed to…."
• "How quickly Government can act when needed – shows that change is possible."
• "Ability of Government to act on scientific advice"
• "There is a magic money tree."
• "Government can make radical changes when necessary so maybe [they] need to make similar sweeping radical changes to the climate change agenda too. See climate change though the same lens as Covid-19 (an emergency). [I] feel it's far more realistic that we can begin making vast changes now; introduce them now as we've got used to a very different way of life anyway."

People's willingness to change

Some assembly members suggested that "people have more willingness to change now" or said they had had been surprised by people's willingness to change. Views included:

• "Think [the] response from [the] public to [the] changes required to reduce emissions will be easier – they'll now be more open-minded to change."
• "We're at a brink where we can change individually – think differently about what we need in our lives."
• "It's made people reassess what is important."
• "The lockdown will help with lifestyle changes: it's shown what is possible."
• "People are willing to do things and the government is telling us what to do. People are more willing than I thought they would be."
• "Shows good leadership and information can make change happen."
• "Shows [the] impact of top down messages."
• "People will act differently if they know why"
• "More important to make people aware of [the] impending climate crisis – [we] can work together if we feel threatened."
• "Coronavirus – daily reports – crucial to do the same for climate change."
• "It's more about reinforcement of the message/issue – media coverage – so much on Covid-19. [What] [i]f that model can be used for that level of coverage – e.g. daily carbon tracker on where we are in terms of heading towards net zero."

Lifestyle changes that have already happened

Some assembly members talked about lifestyle changes that have already happened, and suggested that they had altered their thoughts or feelings. Some focussed on health or mental health :

• "The kids are really healthy."
• "Kids are more relaxed, and love learning at home."
• "Stress and mental health impacts of coronavirus, plus loss of jobs – siege mentality, building walls – will affect how we approach climate change / the society we live in when we tackle climate change."
• "[We need] more focus on resourcing mental health support [around changes like this]."
• "Can't see the grandparents in England; the lockdown has a very emotional and personal impact."
• "Buying locally – farm shops are becoming popular."
• "Shopped in local shops instead of supermarkets. Only used the car once a week. Don't want to use the car anymore. […] You become smarter at doing things. Our overall consumption has been reduced. Not spending as much money at all."
• "Shopping habits have changed and will stay (e.g. transition to once a week shop)."
• "People have realised they don't have to go shopping every day and drive their car, although behaviour is already starting to revert back to what it was before lockdown."
• "Focus more on children and schools, especially reducing what we want / buy – more urgent to do this now than before."
• "People are more interested in food. This is linked to working from home. People used to go out to eat for lunch. There could be implications for healthy eating. We are eating lunches now as a family."
• "It has been a good way to show people how to reduce their impact, for example not wasting food when making meals."
• "People [are] at home and cooking more."
• "We are using more gas and electric at home for cooking."
• "We are using more electricity at home. We don't know what the future holds. There will be change, but not sure what exactly."

One assembly member said "if this is how my lifestyle needs to change, then I don't want it."

For a fuller discussion of assembly members' thoughts on these issues, please see:

• Section B.2.3 on heat and energy use in the home;
• Section B.2.4 on 'what we eat and how we use the land' and 'what we buy'.

Commuting and homeworking

The most frequently mentioned way in which assembly members said their views had changed related to the shift from commuting to homeworking :

• "Finding working from home doable and therefore flying, driving or trains for meetings [are] not necessary."
• "Working at home is nice: we go for walks with the family. Let's fix the world! More clear that we need to sort everything out."
• "Working from home could be implemented by a lot of companies."
• "People and businesses have adapted to a new world, e.g. shown that we can work from home, e.g. twitter staff will now be working from home."
• "It has shown that working from home is more viable. It can support a transition to more homeworking."
• "Reducing emissions from commuting is important and people have been making compromises."
• "Views have changed: changes in transport behaviour [are] very good – reduction in emissions – thin[k] a lot of it will stick – people have more time now as well, not having to commute."
• "Coronavirus is going to be here for a long time, people will keep working from home – people might move out of cities as they're expensive … – reduced congestion in cities…."

Some added that "there is a psychological impact currently, but take away the pandemic and working from home will be a positive change." Others said "companies will be able to save money on rental costs and energy bills" or that "Government should continue to push the message regarding working from home."

For a fuller discussion of assembly members' thoughts on these issues, please see Section B.2.2 on 'how we travel'.

How we travel

In addition to comments on homeworking, some assembly members talked about other aspects of how we travel and changes to their thoughts or feelings. Comments about aviation included:

• "We can't fly. I would normally fly 3 times a year to go on holidays, but this lockdown has made me think about flying."
• "[I] feel a bit different to others. Feel this is going to be the death knell of the airline industry and probably public transport as well (not sure if people will use it to the same extent as before due to on-going concerns of the impact of being in close proximity to others). [I] feel people will think climate change is a luxury, a nice to have, but actually we need to get the economy going in some way and pay off the debts that we've all racked up. So, I don't feel as positive as the others."
• "We were expecting airlines to pay for new technologies, but they may not be able to afford to invest in these technologies."

One assembly member who farms and owns holiday cottages noted that "bookings have gone through the roof – people holidaying in the UK, in the countryside in much greater numbers than in previous years." Others said that the "aviation industry will take years to recover, and people may end up holidaying in the UK."

On cars, some assembly members talked about the "impact of low petrol prices because the government won't want to increase taxes and people feel that the car is safer." Others said they were "worried that the government is telling us to use our cars" or said "it is important to reflect on the changes e.g car usage has come right down, which is great. We don't travel as much, but concerned about the next few months, especially when the weather turns bad, which will push people back into their cars." Some noted "reduced congestion" or said we should "aim to maintain the reduction in travel."

On walking and cycling, some assembly members talked about an "increase in cycling", "pedestrianisation of town / city centres" or a "heightened belief amongst people that there are alternatives – e.g. cycles, scooters, cycle lanes." Some cautioned that "in any alternatives, be aware of sectors of society that might be disadvantaged by that uplift (e.g. visually impaired people and electric scooters)."

Some assembly members said that they "now feel more strongly that we should invest in low CO2 public transport ", or that "more can be done now about travel – trains and changing how city centres are used." Others were more cautious, saying "I'm still keen on public transport, but re-evaluating now (worried about catching the virus)" or that the "pictures of London's buses are shocking – I'm worried about it spreading so will jump in a car."

For a fuller discussion of assembly members' thoughts on these issues, please see Section B.2.2 on 'how we travel'.

New economic priorities and challenges

Some assembly members said that the economic implications of Covid-19 present new challenges on the path to net zero:

• "Coronavirus is the most damaging economic thing post war. Debt will be astronomical. Not sure we can recover from it, so feeling more pessimistic about [our] ability to reduce emissions."
• "The recession will have grave consequences for the climate."
• "Funding will be a major problem – we could be set back 10 years."
• "Biggest worry is how people are coping with this, e.g. my business is being affected. How are we going to construct the green infrastructure if supply-chain businesses fail?"
• "Concern about how sustainable this is. How it will affect the economy, real issue of inflation – collapse of the pound. Currently we're ok as we're in the same boat as every other nation. [What will happen] [w]hen inflation starts kicking in and we can't afford the things we can at the moment."
• "Want to see things back as they were, so maybe net zero takes a back seat to people just needing to put food on the table."
• "Perhaps we can only afford to take small steps towards net zero until we are back on our feet financially."
• "This [the virus] is the priority now."
• "People need to be able to survive short term first, then [we can] look at [the] bigger target of net zero, and look at opportunities there."
• "It [net zero] may be harder to achieve as Government have other pressing problems. They will need to focus in other areas, rather than net zero."

Others suggested that "perhaps we need to focus on net zero options that are cheap in the short term and bring money back short term – e.g. direct air capture and storage [are] probably less feasible now." Some expressed "increased concerns about the finances and the finances of ideas that need more [money] – have we spent it all?"

Opportunities for a green recovery

Some assembly members suggested that the current situation presents a "chance to stimulate the economy through a green revolution ":

• "Economy has come to a standstill and now we're going to have to rebuild the economy and we've got a choice about how we re-build – can go back to the same as before or we can decide to invest more in wind turbines, large public infrastructure projects…."
• "There are big financial implications. Where will the money come from? […] They should find the money to fix the planet. Rewrite the economic system. Fix the world for good."
• "Need to examine the way we run as an economy and how we work and manage our environmental impact."

Others said "we need to invest in UK capacity, skills and industry – we rely too much on China at present." Some felt "we need to be more creative to make it [reaching net zero] possible even if it might be slower and more difficult."

Areas mentioned less frequently

Smaller numbers of assembly members made a number of additional points.

• What we've learnt – some assembly members wondered "how to take into account what we've learnt during this time", or said we "can't forget about this, so how do we remember – risk of sliding back to [the] old normal and doubling down." Others said "alternatives that have been used (during this period) have made an example for the future."
• How little effect the current situation has had on climate change – some assembly members said they were "surprised at how little effect the current situation has had on climate change, so shows scale of challenge – do still need to make some changes even if little impact." Others said the "fact [there's] only [been a] 10% drop in emissions since coronavirus shows how big a change we need to make – huge task." Some reported being "a bit disheartened that the lockdown has not had such a big impact on climate change."
• International context and the UK's global role – some assembly members said that the "UK has a huge opportunity hosting COP26⁷ after this crisis and that would be [the] time that the UK has to show leadership." Others suggested "let's build global co-operation, although worry politics of self-interest will resurface" or that "because it's a worldwide thing – due to this circumstance – maybe everybody will be open to change e.g. being receptive to better ideas and international cooperation on air travel."
• Impacts on food supplies – some assembly members suggested that "food prices will go up and there will be incentives to grow more at home. The idea of not having ferries to Europe is worrying for food supplies." Others agreed saying that "ferries are different [from other forms of transport] – they bring food. If they go bust food prices will go up." Some said "there is a realisation of food security being an issue [and that there] will be long-term consequences. Example of Japan in 1992 – they didn't import rice as they wanted to build food security – it drove up prices in [the] short-term – was seen as a matter of national security." Others queried "would food prices not go down as supermarkets create offers?"
• Views around specific policies – some assembly members questioned "is nuclear still a good idea? Too unsafe/risky" or said that "carbon capture also seems too risky." Some said "we need incentives so businesses can move towards more energy efficient equipment."

Concerns about discussing the implications of Covid-19

Three assembly members expressed concerns about discussing the implications of Covid-19 for reaching net zero:

• "We don't know enough and the topic is too big. […] Our conversation isn't evidence rich or grounded in science. We can't understand the impact of the decisions we're might make; we shouldn't make decisions during a pandemic. To have the assembly make a statement is very difficult."
• "No-one knows what is going to happen."
• "After the pandemic isn't a given, so using this group to plan doesn't make sense. What are the parameters for this conversation? Timelines and so on. Are we assuming the pandemic is going to last 3 months, 6 months or longer? It is very difficult to make recommendations without this – given that the longer the pandemic lasts the more impact it will have on the economy and therefore the more emphasis would need to be placed on the economy."
• "In my opinion the Citizens' Assembly is in no position to pass any comment on the 'implications' of coronavirus on climate change when so little is known about the long term full scale of the impact, suffering and hardships that coronavirus will have on peoples' lives. Failing to seek prior consensus from the Assembly as to whether the Assembly collectively wishes any statement to be made on its behalf linking net zero to coronavirus smacks of political hubris. At a time when lives are being lost and extraordinary sacrifices are being made at the height of a global pandemic is the Assembly seriously being asked to choose between deciding to fund the future NHS, social care, welfare and basic fabric of society vs net zero before the financial and social costs of the pandemic have even started to be felt? I refuse to be balloted on these rash, grossly naive and insensitive questions and I expect to see this response accurately conveyed to Parliament."

One of the three assembly members chose not to participate throughout the remainder of the discussions reported in this chapter.

Some assembly members noted ways in which the experience of Covid-19 and lockdown had not made them think or feel differently about how to get to net zero.

Ways in which thoughts and feelings hadn't changed, and why

General comments

Some assembly members made general comments, noting for example that it "hasn't really shifted [my] views", or that we are "happy with the decisions we came up with." Others noted that it "hasn't changed the requirement to reach net zero … the goal is still the same" or that we "need to make changes, but [we] needed to make these anyway, e.g. travel."

Reinforcing existing views

Some assembly members said that the crisis had emphasised the importance of views they already held, or provided evidence for them. Comments included:

• "Emphasised that future plans should be focussed on emission lowering (with carbon capture as a last resort)."
• "It's still a huge issue that needs to be faced. Lock down is enforcing the point that it is a global crisis – climate change hasn't just stopped because of coronavirus."
• "Always thought the government should lead the way and there's a precedent now. People will do what they say if they believe it's for the greater good."
• "The fact that the coronavirus is now here has given us numbers to support the fact that we would like to have less vehicles on the road but I've always desired to have less vehicles on the road…."
• "These are the options we discussed [earlier in the assembly] – travelling less etc. Just had to have a crisis to push us to do it."
• "The current situation emphasises and reinforces that any dramatic government actions taken to achieve net zero must be well planned, not undertaken in a panic or a rush."

Some assembly members gave specific examples of views that had stayed the same. These included that "we still need to insulate and heat our homes better" and "views on wind farms." Several talked about their unchanged view that achieving net zero will be difficult. Some said that "hitting net zero was ambitious to start with", or that "even though emissions have dropped, it is still not enough." Others said that they "agree that things aren't going to go back to how they were, but don't feel any more positively about reaching net zero – question [of] if government will prioritise it, especially in a recession." Some said that "politicians lack imagination – likely to go back to how things were" or that "climate deniers [are] still likely to ignore the evidence." Some suggested that "public debt could be used as an excuse for inaction."

Others said their views hadn't changed but that they had noted changes around them. For example, one assembly member commented that "you can see the change in the air and I like the wildlife coming out". Another said my "view [has] not changed – [but we] have made good steps towards lifestyle change." Conversely some assembly members said their views had remained the same because these changes won't stick:

• "Don't feel coronavirus will change things much – people will return to spending and the economy will bounce back."
• "We are creatures of habit and [the] short term. Think many will go back to [the] same routine."

Some assembly members suggested it was too soon to consider whether the current situation had made them think or feel differently. Some said "it's too soon to ask this question – ask again in six month's time. There's still so much which is uncertain. Depends on how it goes." Others noted that "the economic impacts have yet to pan out" or that it's "very early days, not sure what's going to happen. Let's wait and see."

B.2.2 How we travel

Assembly members who had examined 'how we travel' during weekends two and three of the assembly next moved on to discuss the impact of Covid-19 and lockdown on their thoughts and feelings about this topic in particular. 73% said that their thoughts and feelings about how to get to net zero in terms of 'how we travel' had changed.

Ways in which thoughts and feelings had changed, and why

Impacts on air travel

Some assembly members said that "there is definitely going to be a reduction in air travel over a decade", that "people will be scared to travel by air", or that "we don't know what will happen. My instinct says that people will travel differently. There will be an enduring reluctance for people to travel on airlines." Some said "people aren't going to want to fly until there is a vaccine. This is good because there will be less emissions."

Others questioned "assuming this lasts for 18 months then is the airline industry going to recover? Budget market will disappear, because of the testing needed and people needing to be packed in. Even if the government says that it's safe, will people want to do recreational travel?"

Some predicted that "airlines will suffer and we will holiday less", asking "will airlines hike prices and expect we will just travel less frequently?" Some commented that "the cost of air fares is certain to go up. The cutthroat market is gone. A lot of volatility in the flight prices", or said a "lot of airlines are now in difficulty – are they going bust? There will be less airlines." One assembly member said "my parents [are] looking to travel to Hong Kong for August – they are being told they have to have 2m distance so most seats will be empty. How will airlines make money from less people? It is still really risky. No one will want to travel too soon." Some suggested that "there will be fewer planes but a bit resentful of that (when seeing planes for cargo) – but see there will be an impact on passenger confidence to fly."

One assembly member said "I am [now] more inclined to favour reduced travel by air…." Another commented:

• "I used to think that I needed to fly for holidays or to see family or for business, but I've now seen that we can make do with less flying. If we had of had the assembly meetings on air travel after the spread of coronavirus and the lockdown, I would have voted very differently for a solution that leads to less flying. Solutions I never would have imagined possible have now already happened. We don't need to wait to transition to a world with less flights. It's already here. Now we just need to invest in the alternatives."

Homeworking

Some assembly members felt that "Zoom may change the way people work", or reported that they were "finding working from home is doable – and there are other benefits such as spending time with kids." Others suggested there would be "less requirement for travel, Government should encourage home working even once a vaccine has been found." One said that "for many job sectors we now know we don't need to constantly move around to get work done, to go to meetings or even to catch up with friends." Others commented:

• "Working from home is going to be more acceptable. I thought it wouldn't work but I am doing it and it is working fine. [I had a] meeting with 8 people at work and 7 of the people on the meeting wanted to stay at home to work in the future."
• "My company had a strong work from the office culture and weren't prepared at the start of lockdown and people are surprised at how well it has worked."
• "Before Covid-19 I used to travel a lot for work – IT supporting GPs for the NHS. Now I do it mostly from home."

Broadband access

Some assembly members said that "there is a lack of investment in broadband by the Government, they need to provide better infrastructure and broadband. People have to have the choice [to work from home]." Others questioned how much lack of broadband access is an issue or said they choose not to have it.

Impacts on public transport

Some assembly members suggested that "we are going to struggle with public transport and more so with social distancing", that "it will have a detrimental impact on public transport usage" or that "people will not want to use public transport as much; people will want to drive; bus companies will go bankrupt because they won't be used as much." Some noted that "its going to be difficult to encourage more public transport but social distancing on public transport is not going to be profitable." Others said:

• "I'm scared to go on public transport. I feel a bit stuck – too far out of town to cycle. I love going on public transport but feel wary of it."
• "I am also worried about going on a bus. You never know how clean something is. I'll choose a car in future. You have to touch something on a bus. It took me longer to walk home. When will it be safe?"
• "The key question is when will we feel comfortable going on public transport. Even on pavements we have the ability to walk apart but you don't have this feeling on the bus or train. People are going to opt for Uber or driving."

Some suggested that "that feeling may well continue into the future – even when the virus is under control" or noted "same for trains. We never thought about it beforehand – but now we are sceptical."

Some felt there would be "less requirement to invest in public transport because of decreased use", while others had the opposite view saying "they will have to put on more buses to allow for social distancing." Some assembly members felt that impacts on public transport "will not be a permanent issue, once a vaccine has been found." One assembly member commented that "people mentioned the issues with traveling on public transport in an epidemic, but we must think sensibly... This [Covid-19] will not be more of a threat than climate change seems to be."

Walking and cycling

Some assembly members said that "people won't want to use public transport, so [the UK] will need to invest in electric cars and cycle and walking infrastructure." Some commented that "the [government's] 2 billion investment in cycling infrastructure will help" or suggested that "public spaces have now been adapted to encourage the public to change habits and consider walking/cycling more." One assembly member said that "I can envisage a lot more people cycling. People seem to be happier taking bikes out and walking. [There is] [t]alk of new infrastructure to accommodate cycling." Some expressed greater interest in electric bikes, with one assembly member commenting "I'd be more interested in [an] electric bike than sitting on a bus."

Some assembly members had a different view, suggesting that "measures such as widening public spaces are all well for good weather, but generally and more so in winter months [the] elderly / vulnerable are not going to use this, they'll need to use their cars or public transport – which need to be readily available and operated in a carbon neutral way – otherwise we'll be going back to existing ways and habits."

Progress on electrification

Continuing the above discussion, some assembly members expressed support for electric cars:

• "I still feel cars are a very important part of our future, especially in the short term, so electrification of cars will have to be massively subsidised for the next few years."
• "I am more inclined to favour … the expansion of electrically powered road transport."
• "I was a very strong advocate for public transport, but being in an enclosed space with lots of other people seems a very likely way of spreading the virus, so I am leaning more favourably towards electric cars than I was before."
• "People are very unwilling to use public transport and air travel now so we need to focus on improving electric cars and completely getting rid of diesel and petrol cars and also improve cycling infrastructure."

Some assembly members commented "electric buses in city centres – why not do [it] now." Some expressed an alternative view, saying "progress for electrification – electric car cost – maybe that won't get pushed forwards now."

Government ability to make change

Some assembly members said it shows that "prioritising what happens [is] in the gift of government", that "this pandemic has shown how Government CAN do something if it really wants to" or that "it has shown what we can do when forced to change … the government has leverage and we can achieve things for the greater good [especially] … when [we] work together." Others had a different perspective saying "it's not going to be as achievable, because of the impact on the economy. The Government will feel they can't shift their focus. This worries me. We are already behind other countries."

Scale of impact

Some assembly members said "it is going to have a mega impact" or that "life will change a lot because of the virus." One commented that "cleaner air and louder birdsong has had a profound effect on some of us."

Others felt that "this experience is going to change people's psyche towards travel" or asked "how will people act if they continue to hear that people are dying?"

Some assembly members disagreed saying "we'll get over it once there is a vaccine."

Speed of change

One assembly member said that "we can change even quicker than I originally thought possible." Another commented that "the opportunity to change and to see change quicker shouldn't be wasted by going back to how things were before Covid-19."

Other

Other comments included:

• "How can governments make predictions to 2050 if they can't even make predictions about next year?"
• "Appetite for buying from China / long distances will be reduced and [there will be] a push for manufacturing in the UK – looking for how things can be made in a greener way."
• "The shift to public transport, bus subsidies, car share schemes, should be abandoned."
• "More people are going to be travelling by car."

Ways in which thoughts and feelings hadn't changed, and why

Views that had stayed the same

Some assembly members noted views that had stayed the same despite Covid-19 and the lock down:

• "Car/planes aren't the problem – fuel is the problem. And there are solutions available for this and that need to be developed and mass produced – solutions are out there…."
• "Still think that we should not just look at [the] impact of passengers flying but also at cargo and find other ways to transport goods … and if prices go up for passengers [they] should also go up for cargo."
• "Still want to travel as much as I can on aeroplanes even if I realise that may take a time to come."
• "Due to Covid-19 [the] Government has been providing info every day to the public / organisations etc. Similarly [we] need a knowledge base for this [net zero] agenda that offers information / solutions on how to get to net zero that is shared and developed."

Views not changed, but greater urgency

Some assembly members said they "…just feel it's more urgent to do it now – e.g. car charging points across the country – this is a massive job and will offer job creation." Others commented that "there is an opportunity and urgency to this and to take the lessons from the experience around Covid-19 and apply it to approaches to get to net zero."

Things will return to normal soon

One assembly member said "I think it will return to normal soon." Another commented:

• "Through both weekends, a huge preference of improving public transport was revealed. While some members of my group today raised concerns that they don't feel confident about using public transport so soon and think the improvements should be pushed back and focused on [electric cars and] renewable energy production, I feel quite confident that society will return back to before coronavirus soon so I feel like I still agree with the push for improving the public transport infrastructure and electrifying it as well."
• "We are seeing today that the Peak District car parks are full – car travel will stay the same and we are selfish and want to be in control."

Additional comments

One assembly member commented that "coronavirus has given us more time to think about things and appreciate what we can't have right now like freedom." Another commented:

"Using online conferencing (Zoom etc) increases the digital divide. […] Ease of use for most people, less travel (environmental costs reduced), save time (travel etc). But negative points are difficulties with global time differences, national holiday dates. [It also] [i]ncreases the gap with digital literacy and [the] economic divide (both between people, and countries)."

Some assembly members looking at 'in the home', 'what we buy' and 'what we eat and how we use the land' also made comments about how we travel:

• Choice of workplace – some assembly members predicted that "the workforce will be more trusted to work from home or work remotely. We need to think about remote working hubs too, so people can still have company but not travel so far. Some people find working from home hard, mentally." Others commented that "people need more choices and options – more localised offices would be good. Plus the choice to work from home, and incentivise it."
• Some travel for work is still needed – some assembly members commented that "the virus and lockdown allows companies and the government to weigh up car use, working from home and evaluate what does and doesn't make sense. 6–8 weeks is very different to the rest of your life. People can have mental health issues. Other industries could be wiped out e.g. office landlords. Building relationships by video conference is hard." Others agreed saying "we will still need to fly / meet people face to face, e.g. to build relationships for roles like sales."
• Less travel is good – one assembly member suggested that "spending more time in homes is better for CO2 – [I] will fly and drive less and use solar and wind power more." Another reported that "seeing very few planes and having less road traffic has made for a more peaceful, healthy environment. You hear the birds better and the wildflowers are thriving."
• Tackle air travel – some assembly members said there is "more impetus to cut air travel now", that it's "more possible for businesses to use conference calls and to cut air travel", or that we should "tackle [the] disproportionate number of people taking [the] majority of flights – more important to do this now."
• Travel on the land – some assembly members suggested that we are "going backwards and relying on cars, e.g. getting out of [the] village for shopping and to see somewhere new for [the benefit of our] mental health." Others noted that "some people [are] still limited in travel options, e.g. from where they live. For example, they need public transport to get to work but can't with social distancing." Some commented that there is "more talk of promoting cycling now, but the problem is when [the] weather is bad – is cycling going to be feasible?"
• Cost of oil – one assembly member commented that "because oil has been so cheap recently, I know of many family / friends who have bought it in the last few weeks when they would not have done previously. I think an immediate change should be to increase the prices again (e.g. through taxation) to encourage more use of renewable resources and use the revenue from the tax to invest in renewables."

B.2.3 In the home

Assembly members who had examined heat and energy use in the home during weekends two and three of the assembly discussed the impact of Covid-19 and lockdown on their thoughts and feelings about the path to net zero for this topic. As reported in Section B.1 above, 35% said that their thoughts and feelings had changed; 39% said they hadn't and 26% didn't know or were unsure.

Ways in which thoughts and feelings had changed, and why

Greater awareness

Some assembly members suggested that the more people are at home, "the more people might feel the incentive to change electricity supply e.g. solar panels, or fitting insulation." Others agreed, saying "if you're in the home permanently [you] would be more aware of what energy you're using in the home" or that you "would think a lot more about it." Some said that "insulation and retrofitting is more in focus, as people have worked from home now and will see the usefulness of it more. For new build homes too." One assembly member commented that "spending more time in the home has made me think about how much energy I need to use due to poor insulation. With more people at home remote working it is important to make sure that we have innovative ways to reduce emissions and I'm now more interested in heat pumps as they are less disruptive in this time."

Implications around energy use and costs

Some assembly members said we are "using more electricity than [we] normally do", that "if we stay at home our homes are using more electricity especially if you have kids at home all the time", or that we are "using more energy in the home – spending more too." Some noted "concern that more power is being used in the home and the impact that may have on bills – this may need more government intervention to address fuel poverty." Individual assembly members commented:

• "My own home is dark and cold. Before my husband started working from home, we didn't put the heating on during the day. Now he's here, we do. His office [i.e. where he works usually] is heated. This has put our costs up. What about an allowance from work to heat our home, or to make it more energy efficient?"
• "The experience of lockdown has resulted in a lot more people being at home and working from home. If this trend is to be long-term then having a plan in place to re-fit old homes that aren't energy efficient will be more crucial than ever."
• "From [a] purely personal point of view, I should not have put off the home insulation project. The last few weeks at home all day would have been warmer and cheaper! – and less CO2 emitted from here. Delay costs money and the environment."
• "We are all using more energy in our homes during this crisis, and we are fast approaching summer. I am concerned that if this had been during the winter months, the effects on people's lives would've been much worse. With this in mind, it has highlighted the need for cheap reliable energy, and I do not want to see people's bills rise in order to pay for green initiatives. We already pay more to fund these green initiatives and I feel the subsidies should be removed."

Views on government action

Some assembly members said that changes "will be driven by industry and government – makes change more likely" or that "it hasn't changed my views on how to do it but it has demonstrated that it can be more 'doable' than I feared."

Some assembly members said that they now "feel this should be more of a common endeavour, not just the government doing stuff."

Financial and economic implications

Some assembly members said that "a lot has gone back to the drawing board, a lot of people have been financially very adversely affected" or that it will be "less feasible for home owners to upgrade homes – for next decade possibly – government action is essential." Others said that "people [are now] focused on keeping businesses going and getting debt paid off" or that there is "less money available to improve homes to become more energy efficient. Virus may delay reaching net zero. Worried government may not allocate sufficient funds to support this."

Some assembly members disagreed, commenting that "we have the wealth (using a global comparison) to do this despite current difficulties – and we should."

Changes to views on specific policies or technologies

Some assembly members said we should "maybe look more at home energy efficiency, e.g. [gas boiler] scrappage scheme – but more energy use in [the] home would be balanced by less office space." Others said they "wonder whether heat networks might be a less reliable source of power if lockdown conditions stay as there will be less industrial activity able to feed them."

Feel more strongly

One assembly member commented that it "made me more convinced of what needs doing." Another said "I feel even more strongly that we must make every effort we can to reduce emissions within the home and all the ways of doing this that we discussed and agreed on are even more important."

Shock

Some assembly members said that they were "shocked by the lack of impact [of lockdown] on climate change" or commented that "everyone has been shocked by what's happened with coronavirus."

Having work done while at home

Some assembly members said that "people won't want workmen in [their] home."

Ways in which thoughts and feelings hadn't changed, and why

No or very little change

Some assembly members said that Covid-19 and lockdown had made "no difference" to their views, or said that "not much has changed for me." One assembly member wrote that "I cannot see much changing in how we use energy in our homes except the high fixed costs of many methods may be more difficult for individuals to cover as disposable incomes fall during the recession. This would be another area where higher levels of government expenditure may be required to reach the net zero target. It will be interesting to see if this changes if some level of lockdown lasts over the winter months." Other individuals noted that "the 'in the home' topic was never really controversial so the solutions we came up with are relatively unchanged", or that "I still think the changes should be made and paid for and incentivised by government led initiatives."

Specific views unchanged

Some assembly members noted specific views that had stayed the same despite Covid-19 and lockdown. Some said that "homeowners were never going to pick up the bill – scale is massive, needs central funding" or that "government should be incentivising people to improve their homes with grants etc." Others re-emphasised the "benefits of solar panels" or said that "the building that has started again – needs to be energy efficient." Others commented that their "views in favour of hydrogen, regional heating systems etc haven't changed – just more urgency."

Haven't felt impact yet

Some assembly members said "it's been warm so I haven't had to put the heating on" or "we're now in summer, so no hardship being locked down. What will happen come winter, when household bills go up? Highlights the need for cheap energy."

Views haven't changed, but we have noticed changes

Some assembly members said they had noticed "more deliveries, increased use of [the] internet" or that "we are using more electricity." One assembly member commented:

• "Think the impacts have been more to do with travel and air travel"

B.2.4 'What we eat and how we use the land' & 'What we buy'

Assembly members who had examined 'what we eat and how we use the land' and 'what we buy' during weekends two and three of the assembly discussed the impact of Covid-19 and lockdown on their thoughts and feelings about these topics. As reported in Section B.1 above, 36% said that their thoughts and feelings had changed; 26% said they hadn't; 37% said they didn't know or were unsure.

Ways in which thoughts and feelings had changed, and why

Food security

Some assembly members said that "the UK is not a food secure country. 53% of our food is produced in the UK, 47% comes from elsewhere – imported, mainly from the EU." Some commented that "as countries come out of lockdown in different ways, importing food may be less doable – might grow more of our own." Others felt that the current situation "prompts [the] UK to be more independent with food – it's not sustainable to import to that extent – not just food, what else can we make here? Raises the question more pressingly that was already raised by net zero." Some queried "are we importing less food currently?" or said Covid-19 and lockdown "made [them] feel more strongly that we shouldn't be relying on imports."

Economic implications

Some assembly members expressed "concern that people are more worried about money at the moment." One commented, "I feel sorry for self-employed couples. Use their savings to get by. Wonder what the financial impacts of Covid-19 will be for many people?" Some assembly members predicted that "less disposable income will probably affect what people buy – maybe higher quality too – changing consumeristic attitudes." Some speculated that "meat use might reduce because it's more expensive." Some suggested that "having limited choices during the lockdown is a good example of what we could face with climate change. Good to see that we have been wasting less. We have planned the meals more. Saved money."

Buying locally and local produce

Some assembly members reported that they "have started buying more locally, trying to get things not imported. Altered shopping habits. Enjoyed doing it because [we] felt [we were] supporting local businesses." Other said they had "noticed people are using local produce more, even if it might be a bit more expensive (especially if they deliver). Used to be lots of people going to [the] supermarket. But because of queues etc, that's lessened and more uptake in local buying." Some assembly members disagreed saying the "uptake in local buying isn't the same everywhere – some places still shop at the supermarket because it's the cheapest."

Behaviour change

One assembly member commented that "consumer behaviours that I wouldn't have expected before I now believe are much more likely to happen (e.g. reusing products) so this effects the incentives required to change people's behaviours." Others noted that "people are sharing more – giving stuff to each other, or reduced rates for key workers, doing each others' shopping – will that attitude continue? Could help with emissions – stronger community spirit."

Change will be easier and is more important

One assembly member said "I think it'll be easier as long as we keep the momentum and use what we are learning now from this going forward." Another commented that "if anything they [the recommendations] are more important now than ever and would be even easier accepted. Very very important [that] diary farmers … get a fair price for milk …. They were being squeezed by the big 4 supermarkets. They deserve a fair price for their products." Other individuals suggested that "just introducing change may be easier as change is already happening" or that "this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to asses what we eat, what we actually need and food supply chain processes. Also transport options can be addressed for future environment targets."

Other comments

Other comments included:

• "People feel closer to nature – more appreciative of our land. We've started looking round and found what matters. Rewilding and respecting nature has gone up in priority."
• "Getting people back to work and kick-starting a failing economy must be a priority."

Ways in which thoughts and feelings hadn't changed, and why

Our recommendations still stand

Some assembly members recorded a "consensus amongst the group that all the points made by assembly members [about food, farming and land use] are still relevant. How do you use the land better? How to use more renewable energy? The whole subject is common sense." Others said they "stand by the principles [previously agreed]: change is still needed" or that "everything that was decided in the Assembly is important. We know it is still important. Covid-19 has made it even more important." Some groups reported that it is "not clear that views have changed in any substantial way."

Our views haven't changed, but we have noticed changes

Some assembly members said differences between pre- and post-lockdown were "more about how things have changed rather than [that] views have changed." Some said that "food costs have gone up (oranges)", that "getting Polish food has become more difficult – miss it", or that "in general consumption patterns haven't changed – just things like not getting a coffee when you're out going for a walk." Some assembly members commented that "we've made big advances towards things that are positive for reaching net zero, and we should keep these things: buying locally and supporting local businesses, buying from local shops." One assembly member commented:

• "It hasn't made me feel differently. However there have been changes to how people shop – many are shopping more locally, or growing their own – and to how people see land use, appreciating nature and seeing the benefits of re-wilding (when you leave nature alone how it flourishes). This is something we can build on."
• "The effects of lockdown differ so much from person to person it is impossible to say. I don't know enough about how lockdown has affected farmers. I don't know if it has affected land use at all so I don't feel I can comment on this."