9 Climate change
| (26379)
6417/05
COM(05) 35
| Commission Communication: Winning the battle against global climate change
|
| +ADD 1
SEC(05)180
| Commission Staff Working Paper: Annex to Communication: Winning the battle against global climate change
|
| Legal base | — |
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 22 June 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 38-xii (2004-05), para 5 (23 March 2005)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No specific date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
9.1 The Commission has said that the entry into force of the Kyoto
Protocol heralds a new phase in international efforts to combat
climate change, and the Community now needs to develop medium-
and long-term emission reduction strategies both within its own
borders and together with the international community. In 2004,
the European Council asked for a cost-benefit analysis to be carried
out before those strategies were discussed, and this Communication
— together
with the accompanying Staff Working Paper —
was accordingly put forward in February 2005 in response to that
request.
9.2 As our predecessors noted in their Report of
23 March 2005, this sought to assess the nature of the challenge,
stressed the need for greenhouse gas abatement policies both to
cover all sectors and to be based on the broadest possible international
participation, and noted that a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
would require substantial changes in how energy is produced and
used, presenting a considerable innovation challenge, requiring
additional technological change in all economic sectors, and involving
what it describes as a combination of "push" and "pull"
policies. The Communication also pointed out that any medium-
and longer-term emission reduction strategies adopted by the Community
would need to address the immediate and effective implementation
of agreed policies, to increase public awareness, to be based
on more and better focussed research, and to involve stronger
co-operation with third countries.
9.3 Our predecessors also noted that the Government
had said that the central premise on which the Communication was
based — that climate change is an issue of extreme and overarching
importance, to be addressed as a matter of urgency by the international
community, with the Community leading the way — was one
with which the UK agreed. They also commented that, although the
importance of the issues raised by climate change was self-evident,
this meant that most of the points raised in the Communication
had in fact already been extensively discussed, and were in fairly
by-and-large terms, but they went on to note that the Commission
had made only passing reference to nuclear power, suggesting that
any advantage in climate change terms would be outweighed by concerns
over security, safety and waste disposal. They therefore said
that they would be interested to have the Government's view on
this point, and that they intended in the meantime to hold the
document under scrutiny.
Minister's letter of 22 June 2006
9.4 We have now received a letter of 22 June 2006
from the Minister of State (Climate Change and the Environment)
at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Ian
Pearson) in which he says:
"The Prime Minister launched the Energy
Review on 29 November 2005. The Energy Review's remit is to assess
the UK's progress against the 2003 Energy White Paper goals and
the options for further steps to achieve these. An Energy Review
consultation, 'Our Energy Challenge: Securing clean, affordable
energy for the long term', ran from 23 January to 14 April 2006.
"Nuclear power currently provides around
19% of electricity in the UK. The Government recognises that nuclear
generation is a low carbon form of electricity generation. We
also recognise that there are issues that would be raised by building
new nuclear power stations, including management of long-term
liabilities such as nuclear waste.
"We are looking at these questions in our
current review of energy policy and assessing the enormous amount
of evidence received during the consultation period. The Prime
Minister has clearly see nuclear power alongside renewables and
energy efficiency as some of the options on the agenda and the
Review will report in the summer."
Conclusion
9.5 We note the Minister's comments, which seek
to address a specific query raised by our predecessors. We also
note that they were otherwise minded to clear this document on
the grounds that the issues it raises —
though obviously important —
have already been extensively discussed, and, in the light of
the information provided in Minister's letter, we now endorse
that decision.
|
