I had an odd epiphany at Christmas. No, I wasn’t visited by three wise men (or women) – instead I was ignored by 29 foolish ones.

A few months ago, to our shock and dismay, we found a notice posted on the lamppost outside our house. It said that our neighbour planned to demolish his house and build five flats on the plot.

Much of the street opposed the development - 23 people in our neighbourhood submitted letters of objection. Most were concerned by the additional traffic and the safety of the children in the nearby primary school; some were fed up of endless flats being built in our village.

ALSO READ: Plans to build five flats on Bicester Road, Kidlington not welcomed by residents

I also objected – but for a completely different reason – because the proposal took no consideration at all of climate change.

Climate change has rocketed up the political agenda this year. From the bushfires raging across Australia, to the floods in the UK in November, you don’t have to be Greta Thunberg to believe that the climate is changing that we have to do something, urgently, to address the matter.

The UK government has committed itself to net-zero emissions by 2050; closer to home, the Cherwell District Council passed a motion last July declaring a climate emergency. The Local Plan for 2011-2031 has 17 policies for Ensuring Sustainable Development, the first seven are explicitly about climate, energy, sustainable construction and flooding.

Almost a fifth of the UK’s carbon emissions come from the residential sector and another third from transport. Achieving our net zero target will only be possible if all new buildings are ‘climate proof’.

But the proposal my neighbour submitted didn’t mention climate at all. There was no commitment to achieve high energy efficiency or ‘passive house’ design; no promise to install solar panels; no intention to use heat pumps or fuel cells, instead of gas; no facilities for electric cars; even the bike sheds were stuck at the end of the garden discouraging use. The proposal treated the climate with contempt.

ALSO READ: New programme promoting health and wellbeing underway for Kidlington

Given the number of objections, the decision went to the Cherwell District Council Planning Committee.

The debate among the Councillors was fascinating. The problem they faced was epitomised by the simple question asked by Councillor Kerford-Byrnes – “Are we allowed to reject planning applications on the grounds of insufficient attention to climate change?” Everyone understood that the proposal didn’t comply with the Council’s own policies – but did that matter?

If they rejected, wouldn’t the developer simply win on appeal since these policies were not mandatory.

All eyes turned to the Council’s Planning Officer who patiently explained that the Council’s climate change policies were “largely aspirational”. The proposal was approved.

Is it OK for the Council’s climate change policies to be “aspirational”? If proposals that completely ignore the Council’s own policies on climate change can pass, then clearly climate doesn’t matter - District Councils have no power at all to insist that new buildings are climate proof.

The fault lies not only with the timidity of the Councillors but also with the fact that central government does not require councils to take this seriously. As a result, Councillors don’t wish to waste public funds fighting appeals that they know they will lose.

Meanwhile, another set of flats is proposed – the sixth in our street alone. No one can be bothered to object – what’s the point? With a central government unwilling to strengthen the resolve of local councils, and most local councillors unwilling to stand up for their own climate policies, is it any wonder why Extinction Rebellion has growing support?

So, my hope for 2020 is that our government and Councillors have an epiphany – and find the courage to respond to the climate emergency that they have already declared.