🔥 "There Is No Emergency in County Durham": An Email Exchange with the Council Leader¶

In July 2025, I wrote to Councillor Andrew Husband, Leader of Durham County Council, after watching him speak at a full council meeting. He argued that climate change was no longer an emergency for the county. To justify this, he referenced Roman vineyards near Hadrian's Wall, claimed climate is merely cyclical, and framed adult social care as a reason to deprioritise environmental action.

His exact words: "The real emergency in Durham is care related."

That claim stood in stark contrast to the overwhelming scientific consensus. 97% of climate scientists agree that current warming is anthropogenic, accelerating, and dangerous. Councils across the UK have declared climate emergencies in line with this — but Durham, under his leadership, has pulled back.

So I emailed him six polite, clear questions. I asked for the data and reasoning behind his public statements. He never answered a single one.

Instead, the man tasked with leading a county of over half a million people chose sarcasm, rhetorical dodges, and personal purity tests. If this exchange is any reflection of how he handles scrutiny, Durham is in trouble.

🔍 The Six Questions He Refused to Answer¶

I sent these by email, in good faith:

Are you suggesting that isolated grape cultivation 2,000 years ago is relevant to assessing 21st-century global climate trends?

What specific data or scientific literature have you consulted that supports the idea that Roman viticulture in Britain has bearing on the current trajectory of climate change?

Could you outline how the presence of vineyards in one historical period invalidates the current scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change?

Are you aware of the distinction between localised historical climate anomalies and global climate trends as measured by satellite data, ocean temperatures, and CO₂ concentrations?

Have you consulted any climate scientists, academic publications, or independent research bodies before making this point in a public forum?

Since you emphasise data, could you provide the full list of climate-related data sources and briefing materials that inform your views?

His reply did not contain a single source, citation, or even an attempt to engage with these questions.

❓ Round One: "Who did the Romans blame?"¶

His first reply was:

"Let's answer this in another way. If Durham warmed back up to the levels demonstrated in my speech (witnessed during the Roman era)... how would you react and who would you blame? Who did the Romans blame?"

This isn’t how evidence works. The Romans also believed in augury and bloodletting. Modern climate science relies on satellite data, paleoclimate records, ocean temperatures, radiative forcing models, and peer-reviewed literature. That he dismissed all this with a rhetorical shrug should alarm anyone paying attention.

He added:

"Happy to continue this debate if you can answer why % of the atmosphere is CO₂? Then tell me what % you wish to reduce it to?"

So instead of answering the questions, he issued a pop quiz.

✏️ My Response: Facts and Courtesy¶

I answered his questions clearly:

CO₂ is currently about 0.042% of the atmosphere. But its impact comes from its radiative properties, not its volume. Cyanide is fatal at less than 0.01% of your body mass.

The goal isn’t to reduce atmospheric CO₂ from 0.04% to 0.02%. It’s to reduce emissions and stabilise concentrations.

Citing a 0.007% local impact to argue against action is like saying your vote doesn’t matter because it’s one of millions. Collective problems require collective action.

I then repeated my original six questions. I was still hoping he would reply like a serious elected official.

❌ Round Two: What About Your Lifestyle?¶

Instead of engaging, he wrote:

"If we don't address the ballooning care problem there will be a £1bn debt and a bankrupt council. You can NOT save the planet with a bankrupt council."

That’s not a data point. That’s an excuse.

He then shifted the topic again:

"May I ask... are you environmentally responsible? Do you take part in flights overseas? What have you done as an individual to reduce your emissions and have you measured it?"

This is classic deflection. When a leader won’t answer policy questions and instead demands to know whether the questioner eats tofu or uses underfloor heating, it’s not debate — it’s misdirection.

📃 My Reply: Answering Anyway¶

Even though it was irrelevant, I answered:

I travel by train where possible (including to Amsterdam and Belgium).

I drive a plug-in hybrid.

I use 100% renewable electricity.

I eat a mostly vegetarian diet.

I recycle, buy second-hand, avoid fast fashion, and repair what I can.

Then I pointed out the obvious:

"Policy discussions should not be reduced to personal purity tests."

And once again, I asked if he would return to the six original questions.

⚡️ Round Three: The Goalposts Move Again¶

Despite claiming he had limited time, he replied a fourth time:

"So you don’t use gas or gas central heating? Have you not yet invested in solar or battery storage? So you have retired from flying altogether?"

He went on:

"Did you know on average an EV takes 7 years to become carbon neutral?"

And then, the punchline:

"Hence my point, there is no emergency in County Durham."

“No emergency.” Not based on a report. Not based on emissions modelling. Based on a vibe.

📈 So What Have We Learned?¶

❌ He never once answered the questions.
❓ He never cited a source, a dataset, or even a secondhand reference.
🧣 He treated scientific consensus like a debate club prompt.
⤵️ He contradicted himself: it's just "the weather," unless he wants to ask what I'm doing about climate change.
➡️ He demanded personal responsibility from a constituent while offering no public accountability of his own.

This isn’t just disappointing. It’s alarming.

🔴 Final Thoughts¶

This is the Leader of Durham County Council. He is not some anonymous backbencher. He speaks for the administration. When he stands up and declares there is "no emergency," it has consequences.

If a resident respectfully asks, "What data informed that conclusion?" and the reply is, "Do you cook with induction?" — we have a problem.

He claimed the council is led by "data and common sense." What this exchange shows is that it's led by neither.

We need better.

full email exchange¶

From: Neil Harris [REDACTED]
To: Cllr Andrew Husband

Dear Councillor Husband,

During the recent council debate, you referenced Roman vineyards near Hadrian's Wall in a discussion about climate change, suggesting this was a time of natural warming. You also claimed the council is now driven by "data and common sense."

With that in mind, I have several direct questions that I hope you can clarify:

Are you suggesting that isolated grape cultivation nearly 2,000 years ago is relevant to assessing 21st-century global climate trends?
What specific data or scientific literature have you consulted that supports the idea that Roman viticulture in Britain has bearing on the current trajectory of climate change?
Could you outline how the presence of vineyards in one historical period invalidates the current scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change?
Are you aware of the distinction between localised historical climate anomalies and global climate trends as measured by satellite data, ocean temperatures, and CO₂ concentrations?
Have you consulted any climate scientists, academic publications, or independent research bodies before making this point in a public forum?
Since you emphasise data, could you provide the full list of climate-related data sources and briefing materials that inform your views on the topic?

Please don’t reply with a generic statement. I’m asking direct questions and would appreciate direct answers. If the council is indeed driven by data and common sense, these should be simple to provide.

Sincerely,
Neil

From: Cllr Andrew Husband [REDACTED]
To: Neil Harris

Hi

Let's answer this in another way.
If Durham warmed back up to the levels demonstrated in my speech (witnessed during the Roman era)...

how would you react and who would you blame?
who did the Romans blame?

Pointing out climate is cyclical is not extremism. Pointing out that the real emergency in Durham is care related is a matter of fact based on the balance sheet, not the weather.

Happy to continue this debate if you can answer why % of the atmosphere is CO₂?

Then tell me what % you wish to reduce it to?

Finally, as illustrated... the rest of the UK needs to catch up with Durham's 64% carbon reduction.

To go further than our remaining emissions are 34% folk heating their homes and 38% transport. As a Council we are not prepared to attack people for having gas boilers or driving a car.

To achieve a 0.007% reduction in the 0.04% of CO₂ in our atmosphere.

Thanks,
Andrew

From: Neil Harris [REDACTED]
To: Cllr Andrew Husband

Dear Councillor Husband,

Thank you for your reply.

Unfortunately, it did not address any of the specific questions I asked. Given your claim that the council is driven by "data and common sense," I had hoped for evidence-based responses, not rhetorical deflection.

To clarify a few points raised in your message:

Who did the Romans blame?
That question is irrelevant. The Romans lacked modern scientific knowledge. Today, we have satellite data, climate models, ice core records, and a well-established understanding of greenhouse gas effects.
Climate is cyclical.
Yes, there have been natural variations in the Earth’s climate. But the current rate and scale of warming are unprecedented and strongly correlated with anthropogenic CO₂ emissions.
Percentage of CO₂ in the atmosphere.
Currently around 0.042%. Small percentages can have large effects — cyanide is fatal at less than 0.01% of body mass.
What percentage to reduce it to?
The goal is to stabilise concentrations and reduce net emissions to zero to prevent further rise.
The 0.007% argument.
That logic undermines any collective action. Public health, defence, and environmental safety all rely on shared responsibility.

Again, I respectfully ask you to revisit my six original questions and respond directly.

Sincerely,
Neil

From: Cllr Andrew Husband [REDACTED]
To: Neil Harris

Respectfully this has already been through full council where we invite members of the public to ask their questions.

To summarise... the most important and simple fact: if we don't address the ballooning care problem there will be a £1bn debt and a bankrupt council. You can NOT save the planet with a bankrupt council.

Even if cash rich I could spend £300m on net zero projects and we will still be where we are by 2030 in terms of CO₂ emissions as a country. As a planet.

May I ask... are you environmentally responsible? Do you take part in flights overseas? What have you done as an individual to reduce your emissions and have you measured it?

The point you are missing is climate action isn't stopping in County Durham. It is just no longer an emergency.

Thanks,
Andrew

From: Neil Harris [REDACTED]
To: Cllr Andrew Husband

Dear Councillor Husband,

Thank you for engaging (ish). While I don’t expect a further reply, I’ll respond to the points you raised.

For the record:

I take the train where possible
I drive a plug-in hybrid
I use 100% renewable electricity
I recycle extensively
I eat a mostly vegetarian diet
I buy second-hand
I repair and reuse
I avoid fast fashion
I support local, sustainable producers
I campaign for systemic action

“You can NOT save the planet with a bankrupt council.”

That’s not an argument against climate action. It’s an argument for integration of priorities.

“The action on climate change isn't stopping... it’s just no longer an emergency.”

Removing the word “emergency” sends a signal.

You’ve still not addressed:

Any of my six specific questions
The Roman vineyard claim
The data or sources supporting your statements

I do appreciate your replies so far. That counts for something.

Best,
Neil

From: Cllr Andrew Husband [REDACTED]
To: Neil Harris

So you don't use gas or gas central heating? Have you not yet invested in solar or battery storage? Have you retired from flying altogether?

A hybrid is commendable. Did you know an EV takes 7 years to become carbon neutral?

I recommend underfloor heating and induction cooking — great that we’re changing habits locally.

Hence my point: there is no emergency in County Durham.

Kind regards,
Cllr Andrew Husband
Leader of the Council

From: Neil Harris [REDACTED]
To: Cllr Andrew Husband

Dear Councillor Husband,

I’m disappointed, but not surprised, that you’ve again ignored the actual questions — which were specific, factual, and directly related to your statements.

You haven’t addressed the Roman vineyard claim, cited any sources, or engaged with my six questions.

Instead, you’ve deflected with personal lifestyle questions.

If you're declaring the climate is no longer an emergency in County Durham — without data — that’s vital for residents to know.

You say you value data and common sense. I’ve asked for both. I’ve yet to see either.

Neil