Climate consciousness could define the Carolean era

“Stability”, “constancy” and “duty” are adjectives we have heard many times this week as commentators reflect upon Queen Elizabeth II’s seven decade reign. In part, her success and the enduring popularity of the monarchy can be attributed to the Queen’s ability to remain distinct from Westminster squabble.

The same cannot be said for her son, the new King Charles III, who in his own words, has a habit of “sticking my head above the parapet and generally getting it shot off”. It is on climate change and the environment that the King has been most outspoken, and arguably the most successful. His climate activism began half a century ago, with a speech in 1970 on the “cancerous forms” of pollution, and since then the King has written books, established foundations and lobbied ministers on environmental causes. In his personal life, the heir apparent pursued a green agenda, installing solar panels on Clarence House, and hydroelectric turbines and biomass boilers at Balmoral. The King’s vintage Aston Martin even runs on excess wine and cheese whey.

So the question is now whether King Charles will resign himself to political neutrality like his mother, or defy convention and become an “ecological warrior King” as the Washington Post suggests.

Even if the King does pursue a more activist approach, he has already shown he is cognisant of the constraints placed upon him. In the first few days of his reign he has already pledged several times to “maintain the precious principles of constitutional government which lie at the heart of our nation”. However there are subtle ways in which the King can continue to champion the environmental issues so close to his heart.

King Charles can demonstrate his support through his choice of visits and speeches, albeit using more veiled language. We should expect increasing patronage of environmental charities, a determination to attend totemic events such as November’s COP 27, and the use of other mechanisms – such as the honours system – to reward those who share his prioritisation of the environment.

What is less clear is whether we will see Prince William become a more vocal advocate on the issue of climate change, or whether the new King can successfully mobilise an at times reluctant Commonwealth to spearhead multilateral efforts to combat it. Needless to say, we imagine Liz Truss’s weekly visit to the King may become one the new PM, and her pro-fracking administration, come to dread.

Monarchist, Republican or somewhere in between, the past week has been a strange one by all accounts. But for the climate conscious amongst us, the coronation of King Charles may be the moment we have been waiting for. A leader with decades of environmental activism and a mindset defined in centuries rather than election cycles, King Charles’ reign could conserve a world for many monarchs to come.

Coffey’s Comms Challenge

The day after her appointment as Health Secretary, Thérèse Coffey announced her NHS approach: ABCD. Ambulances, Backlog, Care, Doctors and Dentists. Although an admittedly snappy slogan, the issues Coffey faces can’t be condensed into a nursery rhyme. In fact, her linguistic style has already raised eyebrows after a miscalculated email to civil servants requested them to stop using the Oxford comma.

Such trivial preferences don’t mix well with the harsh realities of the current NHS crisis. There are over 105,000 job vacancies. The NHS waiting list has hit 6.8 million and will not peak until 2024. This is compounded by the failure of previous Tory ministers to implement effective NHS reform for over twelve years. Coffey inherits the narrative that her party is pro-privatisation and that it is underfunding the NHS, a narrative which has bubbled away, if not grown, as the years have passed.

Tomorrow is expected to be Coffey’s first major communications challenge as Health Secretary, as she sets out an “emergency plan” to tackle the issues facing the NHS. So what can she do?

Coffey must communicate with urgency to soothe fears over the winter. It remains to be seen whether her dual position as Health Secretary and Deputy PM will be a blessing or a curse, potentially leaving her over-stretched. However, her broader remit over the government’s affairs stands her in a good position to talk about the health crises facing the UK in a more holistic, and consequently more meaningful way. Coffey must also recognise and seek to rectify the way the cost of living crisis will impact health outcomes: recent reports of plans to set up ‘warm banks’ with food and heating in NHS centres risk creating dystopian images.

Articulating a distinctive policy from her predecessors is also a challenge. The flurry of health secretaries over the last two years has produced plenty of new announcements but little decisive action. The first signs are not promising, as recent reports suggest that one of her headline announcements will be plans to cut four-hour A&E waiting times. Although this would be an excellent policy outcome, sadly this four-hour target has not been met since 2015. Framing success in such a manner is high risk.

Equally, Thursday’s announcement would benefit from triaging. Chucking money at the NHS is not popular among Tory voters with seven in ten noting their dissatisfaction with the NHS stems from a perception of money wasting. Some ranking system amongst Coffey’s ABCDs would allow her to flex her often noted fastidiousness and provide a soothing sense of strategy to jumpy Tory voters fearful of overspending.

The Tories have rarely found communicating about the NHS easy. Record investments in healthcare have not matched increasing demand and have failed to allay suspicion of the party’s motives. Tomorrow the party gets another opportunity. Two-thirds of the country have not heard of Thérèse Coffey and first impressions count.

Center Parcs create a right royal mess

Issue: How to appropriately mark the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 

In response to the death of Her Majesty QEII, family resort operator Center Parcs attracted negative media attention and mocking for announcing they would hoof all visiting families out of their five UK sites. The operator eventually reversed course, but not before the damage was done.

Context

Businesses across the United Kingdom are altering their services and operations to accommodate the official period of mourning and upcoming funeral of QEII. Some of these decisions are attracting ridicule. For example, the Met Office said it would be limiting its weather tweeting out of respect for the death of the Queen. But it was family resort operator Center Parcs that went viral, with the planned shutdown of its sites drawing opprobrium and waves of negative media attention.

The Center Parcs ‘line to take’

“Following the announcement of the date of the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II, we have made the decision to close all our UK villages on Monday 19 September at 10am as a mark of respect and to allow as many of our colleagues as possible to be part of this historic moment. Guests who were due to arrive on Monday 19 September should not travel, we will reopen on Tuesday 20 September to welcome guests. All impacted guests will receive an email from us today. Please visit our website for additional information.”

Line review

It’s easy to dunk on someone who’s so obviously ballsed up their response, but that’s not why we’re here. Here’s where and why we think Center Parcs’ response went awry:

To begin, Center Parcs forgot their primary audience. The point of corporate communications is to serve your stakeholders. This may be clients, colleagues or customers. It is not an entire nation. This isn’t to say the two can’t or mustn’t align, but if there is to be conflict between the two, you should serve your primary paying audience first.

In this case, parents pay a lot of money and plan months ahead to visit Center Parcs. To have a spanner thrown in those works at short notice was always going to generate friction. It was easily anticipated. Because if you know anything about parents, and Center Parcs should, you know they’re a shouty bunch. Cross them at your peril. 

If the Center Parcs concern was that people would delay their arrivals because of the funeral or cancel a trip, they should have let their normal business practices handle those contingencies and cancellations. And if, as stated, Center Parcs was really shutting down to allow ‘as many of our colleagues as possible to be a part of this historic moment’, where is the evidence of that desire? Were they facing mass worker desertion absent a shutdown? Could they not have organised events on site to allow people to watch, if desired, including staff? Did they really have to reach for the nuclear option? Some simple internal communications could have avoided this. 

The decision smacks of a desire to follow the herd. Center Parcs saw other businesses altering hours and operations and appear to have worried about how they would be perceived if they didn’t follow suit. But the Queen’s legacy also includes steadfastness and service, something Center Parcs should have emulated in their response. And instead of reversing course fully, Center Parcs are still trying to thread some imaginary needle, granting access to the grounds themselves but restricting access to amenities. 

Memo to Center Parcs: when you’re in a hole, stop digging.

Line rating:

Blinder

Strong

Does the job

Problematic

Piss poor ✅