Examination of Witness (Questions 200-204)
DR ANDREW
SENTANCE
8 DECEMBER 2004
Q200 Mr Challen: Could I ask a question
about the issue of grandfathering and whether British Airways
has established a policy on this. Would you want allocations based
on existing levels of emissions or would you want them based on
future forecasts of emissions?
Dr Sentance: I think you have
to take into account what the future projection is likely to be
because only on that basis can you then see what the stretch is
away from that; how much you are expecting an industry to deliver.
But we are conscious of the fact that we are ultimately trying
to achieve very significant reductions from a historic baseline.
In the short term I have said that the main thing is to get something
operating which includes aviation, with a bit of stretch in it.
As we go forward, I would expect the targets and caps to become
more stretching.
Q201 Mr Challen: We would see this might
damage credibility of trading schemes if we see at the start an
allowance for growth in emission within a scheme that is supposed
to have a cap on reducing emissions. How are people going to—
Dr Sentance: But we already see
that. If you look across the European Union, many countries in
the European Union have within their Kyoto targets an allowance
for growth, even though at the global or sort of regional level
we are seeking to reduce the overall amount of emissions in the
European Union. I think we have to keep our eyes on the overall
big picture of what we are trying to achieve globally or regionally.
Q202 Mr Challen: Do you think the existing
forecasts for air transport are environmentally sustainable?
Dr Sentance: If they are accompanied
by policies which ensure that the aviation industry takes account
of its environmental impacts, I think they are sustainable. That
means dealing with the noise issues (which are already in place),
the air quality issues and also the climate change issues. We
believe that emissions trading has a very important role to play
in that.
Q203 Mr Challen: What if the aviation
industry could not contain itself within those limits that were
set? Would you want some kind of guarantee or get-out clause that
allowed you to continue? How would you approach that situation?
Dr Sentance: No, we are not looking
for get-out clauses. We are looking for a pragmatic approach that
takes into account the international competitiveness of our industry,
so we do not have a very stringent approach applied in one region
of the world which hampers its competitiveness internationally,
and we are looking for pragmatism that says we may start out with
something that is clearly less stretching than we have to achieve
over the longer term, and built into our whole approach to climate
change, whether it is the Kyoto protocol or other initiatives,
is the notion that we start off with modest reductions and we
become more demanding as we go forward.
Q204 Mr Challen: Given the intransigence
of the United States on this issue, we are never going to get
that, are we? We might get a rather token scheme but we are never
going to get the international agreements that you talk of and
that is why I am concerned—
Dr Sentance: I am suggesting that
getting emissions trading up and running in Europe in a sensible
and pragmatic way is part of the way of getting the United States
on board. We also support the Government's efforts through the
G8 presidency to clear away some of the undergrowth on the science
and to make sure that there is a much stronger degree of scientific
consensus. I agree with you, it is unfortunate the direction in
which policy has gone in the United States, and it has particularly
impacted on the approach in our industry, but we have to live
with that. We have to then think on what are the pragmatic means
of getting the US on board. I think it is through dealing with
the scientific issues that they have and showing that sensible,
cost-effective, pragmatic policy approaches can work.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed,
Dr Sentance.
| 
