The latest warnings from the Climate Change Committee (CCC) may come as a shock to some readers (UK ‘built for climate that no longer exists’ and needs urgent changes to survive global heating, report warns, 20 May). For those of us who study these systems, it’s no surprise. Britain has kicked the can down the road for too long, leaving the UK dangerously exposed to the impacts of climate change.

When we picture national security, we think of fighter jets, ships and soldiers, but if we can’t grow our own food or keep our homes safe from flooding, the most immediate threat is to ordinary life. This is not alarmism. As the CCC report shows, our high-grade farmland in England and Wales could collapse from 40% to just over 10% by 2050, striking at our ability to feed ourselves. Without restoring our ecosystems, building resilience and making climate adaptation a priority across all of government, we are playing with the future of our communities.

Preparing is far cheaper than reacting. The CCC estimates that every £1 spent on adaptation returns around £5 in avoided harm, while the cost of inaction – already £60bn a year – is on course to reach £260bn within two decades. Our current short-term, reactive approach diverts more of our budget away from vital services and undermines our ability to keep the cost of living lower for millions of households. Yet the CCC’s 2025 progress report found that not one of its 46 measured adaptation outcomes was rated good for delivery.

The government should implement the CCC’s recommendations in full, but experience shows that expert advice is not always the catalyst for action that it should be.

There is another opportunity to strengthen Britain’s resilience that must not be overlooked: the private member’s bill ballot. The MPs fortunate enough to secure a place in the top seven now have a rare chance to help deliver a more resilient, affordable and healthier future for the country. I would urge them to pick the nature and national security bill that the campaign group Zero Hour has proposed to do just that.
Prof Paul Behrens
Oxford University

There is an alternative future to the one Bill McGuire outlined (Heatwaves are becoming the norm. This is what Britain will look like in the year 2052, 26 May). It’s not one that changes the basic facts about heatwaves and climate chaos. What is different is how well we cope with the future based on the choices we make now. In 2026, people across the UK are installing rainwater harvesting, planting productive gardens, developing urban food systems, planting trees for food, biodiversity and shade, retrofitting homes and changing behaviours towards low‑consumption lifestyles.

Instead of waiting for government action, increasing numbers of people are taking the future into their own hands by learning and applying permaculture, and joining a transition group or one of the hundreds of local climate action projects across the UK. Networks with sophisticated skill sets and coherent strategies are ready to help.

What could be different in 2052 is how much we each take responsibility for our own future – literally putting our own houses in order – and how much we can then persuade local and national governments to invest in this broad-based, multi-benefit community work. Activists have been investing in this work for decades. If you are a citizen, please get involved. If you are the government, please invest. The return on investment is a habitable future.
Andy Goldring
CEO, Permaculture Association

Bill McGuire’s article is excellent. On turning to its second page in the print edition, I read the carried-over headline: “This is Britain in 2025: it’s 40C and we all sleep in tents”. Readers will ignore or excuse the unintentional transposition of digits, perhaps blaming it on the 2026 heatwave.
Penelope Maclachlan
Hanwell, London

Surely, in an era when we should be trying to use less electricity to reduce carbon emissions, rather than being urged to install air conditioning in schools, care homes and even our own homes (Report, 25 May), we should be encouraged to install external shutters to our windows, as many European countries already do.

These allow for light to get in and, unlike internal shutters, stop the direct sunlight from getting as far as the window panes, thus keeping buildings cooler. They have the added advantage of keeping properties warmer in the winter, at no extra cost.
Sally Cheseldine
Balerno, Edinburgh