THE Church of Rome is not known for being ahead of the scientific curve, so the fact that Environment Secretary Liz Truss was forced to distance herself from her predecessor’s climate change denials in order to suck up to the Pope yesterday tells us something about the nature of the Conservative Party.

Since evidence for global warming being a result of human activity has been overwhelmingly accepted by scientists for years, how on Earth could David Cameron have given denier Owen Paterson the environment brief?

Surely this was a sign of a backwoods Tory mentality more fitted to the Dark Ages than the 21st century?

Yes — and no. Actually, Paterson’s appointment tells us very little about the Prime Minister’s attitude to science. Nor does his removal from the Cabinet last year.

That was down to his mishandling of the badger cull, when he blamed the hapless beasts for “moving the goalposts” in a staggeringly wasteful exercise that cost over £5,000 per dead badger, and his bad luck in being the man at the wheel when devastating floods exposed the idiocy of plans to cut 15 per cent of Environment Agency staff.

All the main planks of Paterson’s policies have remained in place under Truss, whose supposedly shares the pontiff’s concern for our planet.

The government remains committed to letting transnational companies frack for shale gas under our homes, despite evidence of it causing earth tremors and poisoned water supplies.

It is less committed to renewable energy, as yesterday’s announcement of an end to windfarm subsidies makes clear.

The Tory refusal to take meaningful action to promote green technology and renewables is not down to ignorance, but indifference.

Free-market think tank the Institute of Energy Research spokesman Thomas Pyle was quick to slam the Pope’s implied criticism of fossil fuel use, arguing that “affordable energy makes everything we do ... better.”

Pyle, like the Tories, is defending the status quo because he represents its beneficiaries. His institute’s enthusiasm for free market solutions has not been diminished by the obvious fact that the market has failed to provide “affordable energy,” with gas and electricity bills soaring by nearly 40 per cent in the first three years of the Con-Dems and continuing to rise through 2014 even as supply costs fell.

This is why the Pope’s intervention in the debate should be welcomed. The top Catholic may not be an authority on science, but he doesn’t need to be.

The scientific debate on climate change is over. Rising temperatures, rising sea levels and more frequent natural disasters are happening.

What is needed is a mass movement with the strength to override the vested interests that continue to promote dirty fuel, pollution and deforestation.

And an evidence-based, planned and international response to climate change is hardly possible in a capitalist framework — as Pope Francis appears to say.

“We need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals,” he declares.

“Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximising profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations?” No, it isn’t.

Just as it is not realistic, whatever the Institute for Energy Research says, to expect that maximising profits will lead to “affordable energy.” Or a host of other things vital to all human beings.

People need decent homes, secure jobs, access to clean water and enough food to feed their families, education and healthcare.

We do not need capitalism. The choice is ours.