There is a fine proverb: to miss by an inch is as bad as a mile. Of course, it all depends on the importance of the target. If the bull’s eye is a matter of life and death, to miss by a millimetre can represent disaster. When that target is nothing less than the welfare of the planet upon which we depend, the stakes could not be higher.

What then are we to make of the recent report by expert advisers on the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), that the UK will miss its legally binding carbon targets without urgent government action.

Lord Deben, chair of the CCC, said of the government: “We have given every benefit of the doubt. But even if they do all the things they say they are going to do, to the maximum, there will still be a gap.”

The committee’s main concern is whether we have charted a cost-effective and well-planned roadmap to an 80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Indeed, the CCC’s detailed analysis found that although the UK has already cut emissions by 42 per cent since 1990 and is close to phasing out coal, it is not on track to meet the future targets.

Unfortunately, the government’s track record in this area is not encouraging. The CCC has pointed out that a series of government pledges have little or no detail on how they will be delivered.

One example is ensuring all homes a good level of energy efficiency by 2035. Lord Deben also attacked large house-building companies for not preparing for a more energy-efficient future while making millions in profit.

Perhaps this is not surprising when we consider the degree to which the dreaded ‘bottom line’ bedevils so much public policy and investment. We seem to have got locked into a mind-set where next year’s shareholder dividend or executive bonus represents the end of the rainbow.

Hence the lack of truly long term planning in Britain to meet our climate change obligations.

A recent example illustrates the point. One of the new technologies being rolled out all over the world to help reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions is carbon capture and storage (CCS).

CCS traps the carbon dioxide from coal and gas power plants and buries it underground so it cannot warm the climate. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded CCS is hugely important to tackling climate change in the most cost-effective way. Without CCS, the costs of halting global warming would double, the IPCC said.

A no-brainer then? Wrong.

In 2015 the government cancelled its £1 billion competition for carbon capture and storage technology just six months before it was due to be awarded. Industry figures called the move “devastating” and experts said it would make meeting the UK’s binding carbon cuts as set out in the Paris accords “almost impossible” and more expensive in the long run.

The truth is that far too often rhetoric exceeds reality when it comes to green initiatives in austerity Britain.

Take the wonderful idea for a Northern Forest developed over many years by charities and visionaries. Theresa May took it up recently in a major television interview. More trees, woods and forests would deliver a better environment for all by improving air quality in our towns and cities; it would also mitigate flood risk in key catchments and support the rural economy through tourism, recreation and timber production. Above all, it would connect people with nature with all the health and well-being benefits that offers.

Then we find out that the government is committing a mere £5.7 million to kick start the programme. To put this in perspective, they are committed to spending between £31 billion and £41 billion on renewing the unreliable Trident missile system. Personally, I know what makes me feel safer, given a choice between beautiful, carbon-busting trees and terrifying nuclear weapons.

Really, there are so many examples of why we are missing our crucial climate change targets. But, as ever, it really does not have to be this way. It’s all a question of long term priorities and thinking. Our priority should be a healthy planet. And thus, a healthier York.