So now we know. “Environmentally sustainable must be fiscally sustainable too”. Last week’s budget speech has given us an overview of the government’s priorities for the year and the term of this parliament (likely to end in 2015). In the press, the announcements have been met almost universally with negative sentiment, with catchphrases such as the granny tax and the millionaires’ budget taking many of the headlines. But there is much to consider from a sustainability point of view as well.

For some context, the 2007 budget included a tax on gas guzzlers, and the 2008 speech (at the height of the recession) ordered supermarkets to ban single-use plastic bags, and the announcement that the government’s carbon reduction commitments would increase from 60% to 80% by 2050.

As was widely expected, Rio+20, the environment and development summit in June this year, did not get a mention. Strictly speaking, it is not the realm of economic policy, and the government may be weary of raising hopes of a breakthrough at the summit, so it is keeping the event relatively quiet.

But there were some other, more material elements that were conspicuous by their absence.

1. Energy and…?

It is significant that this section was titled energy, when in previous years it would have been called energy and environment/sustainability. This shows the Chancellor’s reductionist approach to the area – the departments of energy and climate change (DECC) and the environment, food and rural affairs (Defra) are shunted into one title, energy. Broader issues of the environment and sustainability do not play a part in the government’s economic policy – be it biodiversity and conservation, emissions reductions, or pollution and air quality.

2. Green Deal

The single most important piece of environmental legislation of recent years will come into force in the autumn of this year. It will allow home owners to tie loans for energy efficiency improvements to reductions in utilities bills. The perfect combination of financial and environmental sustainability, one might argue. Yet no mention in the budget speech.

Of course, a reason for this could be that the government is showing no material interest in effectively shaping the roll-out. Several informal consultations have demonstrated that the government expects Green Deal partners (utilities companies) to handle the lion’s share of the communication and public engagement. This expectation has not been conveyed to them in any meaningful way, and there is a real danger that the opportunity will sail by unseized.

But the two issues Mr Osborne focuses on – business and energy – deserve some perspective also.

3. Energy

The Chancellor spoke encouragingly of Britain’s “world leading renewable energy sector”. This is a startling assessment of a national energy infrastructure that still produces less than 10% from renewables (in the lowest third of the EU average). There was no mention of reforms to the recently emasculated Feed-in Tariffs (FITs), and nothing on further investment into renewable technologies such as tidal power (which would be an opportunity to be world leading, the UK having more costline than almost any other EU country).

Instead we get more fossil fuels. Gas is to be this country’s largest energy source in the future. Exactly how this is to be achieved is not clear, but will likely involve fracking. We are also to witness significant investments in North Sea deep water oil exploration.

4. Corporate commitments

“This government unashamedly backs business” – this is the red thread that runs through the budget. Apart from the fact that it is mainly pro large business (essentially neglecting SME’s), the accusations the Chancellor levels at existing environmental regulations are unfounded when you look at what businesses are actually doing and saying. Large corporations such as Unilever are actively and publically decoupling business growth from environmental impact. The government could and should help with frameworks that make such initiatives easier. One such programme that already exists is the Carbon Reduction Commitment, which Mr Osborne has clearly marked out for demotion for unnecessarily burdening businesses.

The example of Unilever and others shows businesses actually overtaking the government in terms of ambition and level of commitment, so the argument that an effective regulatory framework unnecessarily burdens business is a hard case to make.

All the while, the Green Investment Bank, a huge opportunity for state-initiated green economic growth, hobbles towards irrelevance because it is forced to lend at commercial rates, which are at a record low.

So, what of the commitments to lead the greenest government ever? Unfortunately, the government has put its money where its mouth is. Fossil fuels instead of renewables. Deregulation instead of effective corporate frameworks.

Environmentally sustainable must be fiscally sustainable too. Yes George, it must. And it is. Welcome to Sustainability 101.