zac, lord goldsmith, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it's a pleasure to have you here. just a couple of months ago, you left rishi sunak�*s government and, as you left, you lobbed a political grenade in his direction. why did you do that? my concern is that, you know, i'm maybe a rare thing, a minister who cares passionately, or cared passionately about my portfolio. and ifound myjob was becoming untenable, it was becoming impossible for me to go forward. it was becoming virtually impossible to prevent government from sliding back. and the key issue is this pledge which was made by borisjohnson, repeated by liz truss, repeated a few times by rishi sunak around international climate finance, from which so much of what the uk has done over the last few years flows, and that pledge was being broken. you say, because it was a pledge of something over... £11.6 billion over five years. ..over five years to be invested in international climate change programmes and efforts. yes. you say quite clearly that the government was way off target to meet that pledge. but the government — and ijust checked with the number 10 website — they say, "absolutely false, we are still committed to that target," and they're still on track. the government is, i mean, look, it's great that the government is saying that they're committed to 11.6, but mathematically, it is impossible for us to meet that target unless the treasury intervenes, unless the prime minister intervenes. it's simply impossible. if you look at the trajectory of expenditure, in order to fulfil that promise, the first year of the next government, which may or may not be this government, it might be the labour party, will have to spend over 80% of all of its bilateral aid on climate finance, and that obviously is not going to happen. yeah, look, let's be realistic about the politics here, because you make the case, you know, you were so disappointed that you said you had to leave government, but you made it personal. yeah. you accused rishi sunak individually, as the leader of the country, of being, "uninterested, fundamentally uninterested "in the environmental challenges "that face the uk nation, but the world as a whole." you say, "i've been horrified..." this was your resignation letter, "..i've been horrified as bit by bit, "we have abandoned key commitments. "our efforts on a wide range of domestic environmental "issues have simply ground to a standstill." and this, tragically, is the case. look, every minister who cares about their brief is always faced with the tension, when things start going the way they don't want them to go, do they stay in there, do they continue to push, or do they blow the whistle and resign? and it felt to me that the odds moved pretty dramatically in favour of the latter course, because i was losing too many battles. the reality is, we don't like to praise ourselves in the uk, but the truth is, internationally, there is no more important voice on the international stage when it comes to the environment, notjust climate change, but the environment, than the uk. and that's recognised by countries all around the world. so when that first pledge was made by prime ministerjohnson at the un general assembly, there was huge applause, particularly from the climate vulnerable nations, from the commonwealth, more than half of whose members are small island states. this meant something big to them, this was the uk massive declaration, "we want to be leaders in this space, "we want to back you up against what you believe. — many of these nations, in fact all small island states — "..is an existential threat." and to then break that promise — which we are — and really what's disappointing, i think, in the last couple of months, is that the government has been allowed to say that it's maintaining that pledge, that it's committed to 11.6. so, they�* re lying 7 your contention is, the government is lying? i mean, a lie implies they know what they're doing, and it's perfectly possible that number 10, the treasury are not aware of the maths. but i am, i was the minister who looked through these figures day in, day out. and i know, as every single person in the foreign and commonwealth office knows, that we are not going to meet that target. no civil servants would ever come on this programme and tell you that we're going to meet 11.6, they will tell you the opposite, or they'll say nothing at all, as civil servants are wont to do. i want to continue our conversation about the environmental challenges and the way the government is trying to meet them and its commitment or otherwise to net zero by 2050, come back to all of that, but i have to, at this point, as we've talked about your resignation from government, get into one other issue, which actually is rather important to you as positioning yourself as a man of principle. isn't the truth that you actually left the government because rishi sunak was so infuriated by the stand you took on the parliamentary investigation into boris johnson and the so—called partygate scandal? so, this was the narrative that was put out by number 10 after i resigned, and it's just not true. i was asked very politely by a colleague, a friend in number 10, to issue a soft apology, not apologising for what i said, but apologising for the fact that as a minister, isaid it. and that's fair enough, a minister needs to toe the line. and, to be clear, for those listening and watching, what you did when a parliamentary committee, a bipartisan so—called privileges committee, had looked at borisjohnson�*s words and behaviours around this partygate scandal that we all remember, the privileges committee ultimately found that borisjohnson had deliberately misled the house of commons. he had committed a contempt of parliament. you then came out and dismissed the findings of that bipartisan committee as, "an appalling witch hunt, "an anti—democratic kangaroo court." how could you do that? so, i'm going to try and be brief on this, because it's so unimportant compared to the issues. i would like that. but the reality is that if this committee had been a court of law, it would have been struck out on day one for the simple reason that almost all of the mps on that committee had expressed their verdict long before they saw any of the evidence — almost all of them. i'm sorry, but you're an experienced parliamentarian, you know that the house of commons works on rules, those rules have to be accepted by everybody. 0k. there is a privileges committee, it is bipartisan, and they reach their conclusions, which in the end overwhelmingly were accepted by the house of commons. that's the system. but mps are fallible people and they're ordinary human beings. perhaps in some respects, mps are a particular species, i don't know. you cannot expect a fair hearing when almost all of the members of a committee have already told the world what they think the outcome should be before. interesting. you called it a kangaroo court, which is exactly the same phrase that borisjohnson used. the truth is, you are a long—standing, very close friend of borisjohnson, he gave you a job in government. basically, you decided that you were going to stick with your mate, and that... not at all. ..is the reason why rishi sunak had no trust or faith in you. not at all. i think he did have confidence in me doing thisjob, i did a good job as environment minister. i think that on the world stage, the uk on my watch became the world leader on the environment, on climate. that's been recognised by countries all around the world, as we saw when i stepped down. my loyalty, i'm a friend, of course, of borisjohnson in the political context. he's not someone i knew before i entered politics. hang on, you're a friend in every context — you lent him your home in marbella! hang on a second. my loyalty, as anyone i've worked with since i was 18 and became a committed environmentalist, will know, anyone in good faith will tell you my loyalty is to these issues. i am deeply concerned by what's happening to the natural world, i've committed my life to tackling these issues. small—time personality politics in the houses of parliament are totally irrelevant in that context. so... stephen, let me finish, because had borisjohnson gone back on 11.6, which at one point i thought he was going to, incidentally, but had he gone back on 11.6, i would have issued a tirade against him and i would have resigned, because this issue is so much more important than anyone, indeed all of them put together in parliament. just a quick final thought on borisjohnson, then we'll get back to what you say are the much bigger issues. do you now accept that borisjohnson has done enormous damage to the party you are still a member of, the conservative party, and indeed done enormous damage to the nation? i don't accept that. borisjohnson is a man with numerous flaws and numerous qualities. my view is that we had a big majority, which was secured in a general election that he presided over, and on his watch, the issues that i care about are areas where we made huge progress. there has never been a prime minister in this country who's done more on the environment than borisjohnson. that is simply an objective, observable fact, and that's something which even his enemies, those people who are most hostile to him, now pretty much across the board accept. so for me — and having put me in a position where i was able to be part of that progress, that story — i feel very grateful to him. and i will continue to try and build on what was achieved. so the theme so far of our conversation is that you care above and beyond anything else about doing your best to help this country meet the environmental challenges it faces ? outside of my family, it's the only thing i care about. the only thing you care about? it's the only thing i care about. well, why on earth did you choose to resign when, in the words of former tory minister, your colleague andrea leadsom, she says, "it is so much easier to throw your toys "out of the pram..." like you did, "and become a protester "than it is actually to stay inside the tent "finding solutions"? because i did four years as a minister, i got an enormous amount done. in the last few months, every day, i'd have discussions with my brilliant officials about how difficult things were getting, and i realised that i was losing the battle on notjust small things, but big things like the 11.6 billion. and i was going to have to stand up in parliament and pretend we're going to hit 11.6, pretend that all those commitments we made to small island states are valid, that we're not going to betray them, when i know, and i knew then, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that that was not true, and i couldn't do that. and i felt that by resigning, by blowing the whistle on the 11.6, that the government would feel obliged to prove me wrong. and some of the quotes that you read out earlier give me a little bit of hope that maybe that happened, maybe they will struggle, find something down the back of the sofa to honour that pledge. but it's not going to happen unless the government, that the prime minister or the chancellor directly intervene, and that is what we need to hope for. and until they do, they should not be allowed, in my view, to pretend that this 11.6 promise is going to be honoured, because it isn't. it is a mathematical impossibility. 0k, got that. i posited the question earlier about whether there is now the signs of a real backlash, particularly inside your conservative party, against the green agenda? i'm mindful that when you entered politics back in 2005/06, david cameron was pushing this idea, "vote blue", i.e. tory, "and go green". well, now what we see are very senior conservatives backing away, explicitly backing away from the commitments to cut emissions very significantly by 2030 and to get to net—zero by 2050. your party no longer buys it? i would say, and it's very hard to measure this, but i would say there are more people in the parliamentary party, and it's probably true of members as well, who are committed to seeing through the commitments we've made on the environment, not just carbon, but on the broader environment as well, than those people who are pushing back. unfortunately, those who push back are tougher, they're louder, they're more aggressive and they're effective at grabbing the mic. priti patel, former home secretary, "we need to pause all of this activity." and she is in a minority. "the public are not ready for it." craig mackinlay, the chairman of a new group, i think they've got more new members than the net zero scrutiny group... you could name 30 or a0 people, no doubt. i'm telling you, one group has more than 50 mps and their numbers are growing. but then equally, there are many, many more members in the conservative environment network, which is committed to net zero, which is committed to the broader environmental agenda, and let mejust make one point, stephen — in every single survey that has ever been conducted, and i've commissioned a few myself, i've read many, every single one demonstrates beyond any doubt that the majority of voters, from whichever party they belong to, support greater action on biodiversity, nature on the environment. you're not reading the tea leaves. the conservative home website just did a series of polls just in the last week or two. a0%, they found — of tories, this is — oppose the net zero target. 33% think global warming is not driven by human activity. but these aren't ordinary people, this is a self—selecting, highly partisan... conservatives aren't ordinary people? this is a highly partisan website with a particular self—selecting readership. i'm talking about formal, official, professional, independently conducted surveys by those people in a position who know what they're doing. and in every case, including two that came out this morning, in every case, a clear majority of people, even slightly more among conservative voters, want more action on nature, cleaning up our rivers, protecting our biodiversity, planting more trees, and more action on net zero. so i don't buy that. but you know what many conservatives will say to you — "zac goldsmith, get real — "look at actually what happens in elections." they'll point to the uxbridge by—election. for those not in the uk, uxbridge is a suburb of london where a key issue when voters went to the polls to choose a new mp was whether there should be a charge for older vehicles, more polluting vehicles, to enter into that part of outer london. and it was the issue which seems to have swung the vote in favour of the conservative candidate who opposed that ultra low emissions policy. that outcome proves only one thing. what? that there was an environmental policy which was going to bash up a lot of people who couldn't afford to pay that tax and who reacted against it. there is good policy and there's bad policy. it's a bit like saying that because margaret thatcher got it wrong on the poll tax, all taxation should be banned. it was a clumsy policy which needed to be rethought and i personally have no problem with that. what i do have a problem with is an idea that we should abandon the aspiration that we should pursue cleaner air in london, or that we should pursue efforts to reduce our emissions, or that we should do what we can to realign ourselves with the natural world on which we depend. right, so... those outcomes are beyond question, in my view, but there are many different policy ways of achieving that. so, let us return to rishi sunak. we discussed him earlier. let's now discuss his, it seems, very personal commitment to opening up new north sea oil and gas exploration. 100 new licences being issued by the sunak government. let's also talk about the degree to which he is now backing the motorist in a perceived war on the motorists that some green campaigners, according to members of the tory party, are now running. what do you make of these signals that rishi sunak is sending to the british people? so, i'm confused as to who rishi sunak thinks he's talking to. he talks about "the motorist". well, i'm a motorist, you're a motorist. most of the people watching, — from this country, at least — this programme, whatever their views on the environment, are, at one point or another, motorists. they're not a self—contained species whose vote we're seeking to secure and attract. it feels to me that rishi sunak is speaking to a very, very small group, a rump within — a very noisy rump, albeit, and a powerful one — but within the conservative party, and he's mistaking that for the voice of the people or even the voice of the conservative party as a whole, and i think he's going to fall flat on his face at the election, unless he comes to his senses between now and then. crosstalk hang on, you'vejust said something very important, and as the guy who told me just a few minutes ago that this, beyond yourfamily, is really the only cause that really matters to you day in, day out, i am assuming, given what you've just told me, that right now, you are saying to yourself, "i can't vote for rishi sunak�*s conservative "party, i am going to have to look elsewhere." we have plenty of time before the next election. i'm desperately hoping the conservative party comes to its senses. i don't think a mainstream political party merits any support at all at the polls, unless it has a comprehensive, coherent answer to what is the biggest challenge we've ever faced. and again, i'm notjust talking about climate change. i'm talking about the fact that we're losing 30 football fields�* worth of forest every single minute, the fact that two—thirds of our coastal wetlands have gone, the fact that over a million species face extinction. this is an existential crisis that we're facing. a party that doesn't have a clear answer to that challenge does not deserve to be supported. but to be clear... so, my hope very much is that the conservative party comes to its senses and rediscovers a commitment to tackling these issues. at the moment, it's not. yes, i'mjust looking at what the leader of the labour party opposition, sir keir starmer, has been saying in recent days. he's been saying, "we absolutely will treat the clean "energy transition as a national mission. "we will not trade the nation's long—term interests "for short—term gain." he's making specific promises about onshore wind, about sticking to the 2030 deadline, for making sure all new cars are either electric or hybrid. he's making specific promises which meet your challenge to take this as the number one political priority. i assume at the moment, unless sunak changes, keir starmer is going to get your vote? i think keir starmer — i was delighted to read his op—ed, i think it was today, it might have been yesterday, in the times — and i think he gets that this is notjust a do—good package of policies. this is about our future as a country, that all the jobs and growth are in this colossal economic transition that we're embarking on at the moment. to turn away from that would be economic insanity. we know that the market has already decided. whatever politicians say, the market has decided this transition is going to happen. coal use fell faster under president trump than it did under president 0bama, despite all his efforts to prop it up. with respect, you're not answering my specific question, which many people will be very interested to hear your answer. no, you're right. so, i'm delighted that he gets that, and i think he does get that. my concern about the labour party at the moment — and i don't say this as a tribal politician because i'm not a tribal politician — is that i think there is a blind spot on the natural environment. so, everything, when the labour party thinks environment, when it talks about the environment, it's thinking carbon and taxation, regulation and all the things that go with that. and the simple truth is there is no pathway to net zero, there's no solution to climate change that does not involve nature, massive efforts to protect and restore the natural world. and at the moment, i'm not hearing any of that from the labour party. if i do, if there's a real commitment, the kind of commitment, frankly, that we saw when boris johnson was the leader, then i would be very tempted to throw my weight behind that party and support them in any way i could. incidentally, i would support them anyway in their efforts on these issues, because it's the only thing that matters. let's just think in a slightly broader way about what's happening in politics. there's a very interesting comment from tim bale, a respected professor of politics at london university, he says, "what we are seeing right now is the tory party "in particular engaging in a much more populist way "of handling the climate challenge." and it's not actually just in this country, we see it in other countries too. does that worry you? well, it depends what you mean by that. there are two things — there are the policies and there's the language. and it's absolutely right that parties should debate the best possible policies for achieving what we want to achieve. and, as i said before, there's bad policy, there's good. no, but the populism element is partly... ..but the language. well, the issue is being portrayed — and the daily telegraph in an editorial used this phrase recently — the elite indulging in climate politics at the expense of ordinary working people. now, you speak as a multi—multi—multimillionaire, you are part of the elite. is it people like you who are indulging in the politics of climate when others are being hit hardest in their pockets? first of all, it is worth just noting that the greatest campaigns for action on climate change come from the poorest countries in the world. that is, when you go to the un, you're not hearing from america, uk, germany, france, you're hearing from the most vulnerable countries in the world. those are the countries that are demanding international leadership and action, particularly from countries like ours, but they're doing it as well. the second point is that almost all of the steps that we need to take in order to deal with climate change are steps that we're going to have to take in any case. these are sort of win—win policies. there's that very good meme doing the rounds on social media — what happens if we're wrong about climate change and we end up with cleaner air, cheaper energy, more decentralised grid and less pollution? and that is the truth. i mean, when it comes to things like carbon capture and storage, that is something perhaps that we wouldn't be doing if it wasn't for climate change, but that's pretty much the only exception. solar power has come down 90% in cost since the banking crisis. so two—thirds — two times more money invested in 2021 — was it last year, the year before last? — in renewable energy than in fossil fuels. the market is hurtling in this direction. that's where the jobs are, the opportunities are. and we can listen to one or two siren voices in the conservative party and decide to pour public money into propping up a system that's going obsolete, but if we do that, we'll be left behind and other countries will win that competition. it patently is more than a few siren voices, because we've discussed what rishi sunak is actually doing, and some of the stuff he's doing, you do not like, that's quite clear. but that's why i made the distinction between policy and language. the problem, and i notice this as a minister, is that the language matters as well. so, even while in many respects, the policy is not going to change — we'll get a bit of whistle—blowing by the prime minister, but the policies aren't really going to... yeah, but hang on... ..but the message is having a big impact in government, it's rippling through the civil service. we're almost out of time and it's been a fascinating debate. i just want to know how you are going to try and leverage influence now that you've left the inside of the power tent and you're outside the power tent. you are a man of great wealth, you're a man ofjournalistic and advocacy skill. how are you going to try and influence the debate now? as a minister in the uk, i was able to convene coalitions of ambition from all around the world to do some really exciting things. those things are not finished yet. i was not able to do that continuing as a minister. i will do what i can to continue doing that outside of government, and i will try to recreate or strengthen those coalitions outside of government, working with friends from around the world who are in positions of authority, whether it's governments, whether it's former ministers and leaders, whether it's philanthropists, or ngos, and try to ensure that those promises that have been made over the last few years, in part because of uk leadership, are delivered. if they end up languishing on paper and not being delivered, whatever tiny thread of trust there is between people and power will just disintegrate. in the course of that, yes or no, do you think you will part company with the conservative party? i will do everything i can to re—green the conservative party if they continue too far in this direction. every party needs a green response. myjob, i think, as a conservative is to make sure that the conservatives have that response. zac goldsmith, we have to end there. thanks very much for being on hardtalk. thank you very much. thank you. hello there. let's take a look at the weather for the week ahead. with low pressure nearby it has been an unsubtle picture again. blustery on saturday with some sunshine recorded by a weather watcher, but also a good scattering of showers such as here in cambridgeshire, and as we head through sunday it is a quieter looking day, still windy for the time of year, but not as blustery, and still some sunny spells but fewer showers around. this is the satellite picture from earlier on on saturday. you can see there is another deep area of low pressure just approaching from the south—west as we head through sunday with yet more heavy rain moving into scotland and northern ireland. but this is how we start the day on sunday — on a largely dry note. it is also mild out there as well — temperatures between 1a and 16. still a keen south—westerly wind but not as blustery as it was on a saturday, and there will be a good scattering of showers too, but they won't be as heavy or as thundery as they were on saturday. still possibly a rumble or two off thunder across the moray firth, and there will be further spells of rain moving into northern ireland and parts of western scotland by the end of the day. top temperatures in east anglia where it will tend to be driest and brightest, 23 celsius, but this is the position of the rain on sunday night into monday morning. that is going to be moving northwards and eastwards across much of wales, south—west england, central, southern england and into northern england too. it could be that scotland sees a largely dry day, a scattering of showers out towards the east, some heavy and thundery, possibly mostly dry for northern ireland, and lots of dry weather too across east anglia and the southeast of england, although still the risk of some showers here. as we head through tuesday, that deep area of low pressure is moving toward scandinavia and high—pressure starts to build in but still various fronts waiting out in the atlantic. they will be stalled. on tuesday then it is a mostly dry start, but a very murky start to the morning. there is lots of low cloud around, some areas of sea mist and fog as well, possibly some sharp showers breaking out across central and western areas of scotland, but plenty of dry weather too, and as that cloud tends to break up there will be sunshine emerging. 22 or 23 celsius across east anglia and southeast england. and then on wednesday high pressure is centred towards the north of the uk. that is going to be pushing further eastwards. low pressure out in the atlantic again, but, of course, it is being stalled by that high pressure. it is another murky start to the day. there will be plenty of mist and fog around, lots of low cloud too. again, the sunshine will begin to break through. and temperatures across central, southern england, perhaps western areas of east anglia could get as high as 25, even 26 celsius on wednesday, and it is looking pretty similar again on thursday. again, there could be a few showers around. there will be some low cloud to start the day. temperatures pegged back towards north sea—facing coast too, with perhaps a bit of sea mist around, so just the high teens here. we will start to see some rain approach northern ireland by the end of the day. this is the position of the jet stream as we head through next week. some debate about how far north it will be, but it is drawing in, of course, this air from southern europe, so it is going to start to feel a little warmer across southeast england and possibly southern wales as well. staying unsettled and cooler further north towards the north of the jet stream, but across cardiff with could see temperatures rise into the mid 20s, possibly the high 20s across london and the southeast, and then cooling down somewhat over the weekend. bye—bye for now. live from washington, this is bbc news. searching through the rubble, teams look for more victims of the deadly hawaii wildfires, with warnings this could become one of america's worst fires. iam i am helena iam helena humphrey i am helena humphrey on maui, as we await the governor, with questions growing about the emergency warning systems. and former president donald trump stokes support at the iowa state fair, meeting fans in the crucial primary voting state. more resources are being sent to the hawaiian island of maui as the search for victims intensifies in the wake of devastating wildfires. the historic town of lahaina, the worst—hit part of the island, has been burned almost entirely to the ground. for now the death toll stands at 80, making it the deadliest natural disaster in hawaii's history. the us government estimates that the fire has caused more than $5.5 billion of damage. meanwhile, fires continue to burn. helicopters are being sent to douse the flames, one bucket at a time. many people forced to flee at a moment's notice had