When the righteous deny the real danger of heat waves, ask yourself this: whose children’s lives are they willing to risk? | George Monbiot

Ejust when you think idiocy has reached its lowest point, it reaches a new level. It turns out there’s a much deeper hole to dig yourself into than denying climate science: denying heat stress. In multi-billion dollar newspapers last week, writers and leading writers downplayed the health impact of the heatwave, especially in schools. Expect more this coming week, when temperatures are predicted to rise again.

An editorial in the Telegraph (representing the newspaper’s opinion) entitled “Warnings of hot weather treat the public like children” stated that “unlike the 70s, when people were trusted to take care of themselves, officials now feel the need to talk to the public about the dangers of hot weather at every opportunity”. Extreme heat warnings are being issued and weather maps are being “painted scary red”. It’s sad! Instead of issuing warnings, the government should just trust people to “take appropriate precautions”. We all have to “learn to live” with it. Okay again: what happened to the bulldog spirit of ignorance and needless death? Cricket, warm beer, excessive death: these are the symbols of the national character.

And in the Telegraph, under the headline “Heatwave hysterics wouldn’t last a day in 1976”, correspondent Ysenda Maxtone Graham emphasized that during the heatwave that year – which she remembers as “two months of euphoric frenzy” – “common sense was used by many without the need for obstetric intervention”. However, now, “health messages range from cogent – tube announcements urging travelers to carry a bottle of water – to the absurd, as if a healthy adult could die from too little exposure to the sun”. Ignore unhealthy seniors. Or people with disabilities, the elderly, or children, all of whom may be at greater risk. He said in 1976, “schools are not closed because of the heat”, and that children and teachers are “sliding in 30 degree classrooms”.

Maxtone Graham’s column was remarkably similar to Jane Moore’s in the Sun, headlined: “Why on earth do schools need to CLOSE in hot weather? Moore remembers 1976 as “the best summer of my life”. Apparently there was a “gung-ho spirit” that “should be used as a general measure of common sense”.

The Daily Mail ran an article with the headline “in 1976 … schools stayed open”. In fact, as Leo Hickman of Carbon Brief points out, schools DID at least close early during the 1976 heatwave, even though June temperatures never reached the records set last week. And in 1976 the heat was dry, while last week the humidity was high, increasing the health risks. But as soon as such a hole is dug, the entire rightwing media seems bound to jump into it. It is often said that the left preaches unity and fights like cats in a sack. But the righteous preach oneness while repeating empty and unsubstantiated claims in unison.

There is strong evidence that warnings and advice save lives. The Red Cross found in 2023 that there was a surprisingly poor understanding of the health risks of heat waves in the UK, where they were rare. A study reported in the journal Energy Research & Social Science last year found that 49% of participants had “little knowledge about how to cope with extreme heat”. However, the government’s warnings, no doubt pleasing to the Telegraph, remain vague, difficult to interpret and not backed up by effective action. Let the bodies pile up.

Remembering fondly the halcyon days of your youth is not a good basis for strong comparisons. But what highlights this issue is the politics of the neglected class. There is nothing new about feathered bloggers in fancy houses on leafy streets or air-conditioned offices telling other people to get stronger. But class inequality in heat insulation is worse in Britain, where homes and public buildings are grossly inadequate.

The paper I mentioned above also found that 82% of households reported difficulty keeping at least one room cool during the summer. The rate of overheating in the poorest quintile was “double that of households in the highest quintile of high incomes”. Many other studies have done the same. Constant temperatures are the preserve of the rich.

Extreme heat affects children – who have a high metabolism and low sweat rate – more severely than most adults. Their thermal comfort levels are, on average, 1.9-2.8C lower. There are many reports of children throwing up and losing consciousness in the classroom during the heat. Temperatures above 25C limit their cognitive function. The government’s Committee on Climate Change finds that “taking exams on a 32C day leads to almost a 10% chance of passing compared to a 22C day”. Another advantage is private schools, which can afford better buildings and air-conditioned exam rooms.

But, as the government assures me, it does not set a high temperature limit for schools. Otherwise it may have to do something. Instead, it advises schools to open and close doors and windows and reduce heat from equipment: advice that leaves teachers with closed windows and impossible heat loads in despair.

A new study of schools in Hampshire finds that 66% of classrooms present a “risk of intellectual disability”. If no action is taken, this will rise to 92% by 2050. Already, “heat stress” – temperatures that are dangerous to health – affects 6 percent of classrooms. Many school buildings, especially the “lightweight, glazed, one-dimensional models” popular from the 1950s onwards, are not very suitable for hot summers.

Due to the difficulties of the years, many classrooms are in bad shape. School buildings that should have been replaced decades ago are still in use. It is impossible to escape the conservative architects of the system that rejecting social provision also privileges their class. No wonder they manipulate the competition, which they clearly manipulate to their advantage.

Therefore, as before, the rich teach the poor, and demand the removal of weak defenses that could improve and protect their lives. Their claim that “we need to be tough” seems to translate to “see it must be difficult”, while ours lives get better. Active ignorance is the default condition of such journalism. But I can’t help but wonder if there’s an element of cruelty in being happy, cruelty: I’m good, so let the great unwashed get what they deserve.