Skip to content

Navigation breadcrumbs

  1. Home
  2. Blog and News
19th February 2025

Part 2: An interview with Pat Hart, a GP sent to prison for a year for climate activism

The first part of this interview has already been published (link below). We went ahead and published the first part of the interview because of the delay and limitations in getting responses by email. The section below completes the interview.

What arguments will you make in your defence to the Medical Practitioner’s Tribunal Service (MPTS) when you appear before them?

I feel like saying to people what was once said to me: is there nothing you would risk prison for? Is there nothing you would risk your career for? Not for the people you love? Not for your country or your home? Because these are all the things you stand to lose.

I don’t really expect to persuade the MPTS. I just plan to tell them the truth about why I did what I did. I have acted in the best interests of my patients and at great cost to myself. They may very well find the methods I have used to be distasteful, but this does not change the fact that it is the morally right thing to do. I was deeply saddened and disappointed but not completely surprised that those who came before me were suspended for their actions. I do not expect to be treated any better.

The GMC, like so many institutions, have demonstrated historical moral failure (such as disciplinary action taken against homosexuals for which they recently apologised). I fear this is just another case where they will only come to realise their error long after the fact.

Do you recognise that the GMC operates under an Act of Parliament and has limited room for manoeuvre?

In court it is common to hear the argument that, however justified an action, the rule of law must take precedent. This is enabling a system which will inevitably lead to the collapse of the rule of law. Our legal institutions cannot survive climate collapse and resulting societal breakdown. The GMC could chose to adhere to the prescribed legal framework but voice their concern and call for reform if they so wished.

What would you like the GMC to do?

The same thing I would like every institution to do, to recognise the climate crisis as the threat to human life and civilisation that it is then actually act as if it is real. So far they have refused to even accept climate related amendments to the good medical practice guidance.

There is no indication they are taking the issue seriously.

You have paid a heavy price for your actions. Are there others—perhaps family or professional partners—who have also been affected? If so, how?

I have been very aware throughout my climate campaigning that it will have knock on effects to those around me but they have all shown remarkable resilience and acceptance.

How do you think health professionals as a group might best respond to the climate and nature crisis, which is becoming rapidly worse

Sadly we have now missed the window of opportunity to avoid catastrophe. A mass popular uprising might be enough to create the radical change needed to curb emissions, but I don’t think this will happen. I plan on learning how to grow food to prepare for the famine which is likely to come about in the coming decades. Sadly I am unable to give a more hopeful answer. I continue to do what I can, not in the hope of change but in order to live the best life I can in the face of this tragedy.