Formal Minutes
Monday 17 January 2011
Members present:
Mr Andrew Miller, in the Chair
| Gregg McClymont
Stephen Metcalfe
| | Stephen Mosley
Graham Stringer
|
Draft Report (The Reviews into the Climatic Research
Unit's E-mails at the University of East Anglia), proposed
by the Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft
Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 97 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 98 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from "science"
in line 3 to the end of the paragraph and add "There are
proposals to increase worldwide taxation by up to a trillion dollars
on the basis of climate science predictions. This is an area where
strong and opposing views are held. The release of the e-mails
from CRU at the University of East Anglia and the accusations
that followed demanded independent and objective scrutiny by independent
panels. This has not happened. The composition of the two panels
has been criticised for having members who were over identified
with the views of CRU. Lord Oxburgh as President of the Carbon
Capture and Storage Association and Chairman of Falck Renewable
appeared to have a conflict of interest. Lord Oxburgh himself
was aware that this might lead to criticism. Similarly Professor
Boulton as an ex colleague of CRU seemed wholly inappropriate
to be a member of the Russell panel. No reputable scientist who
was critical of CRU's work was on the panel, and prominent and
distinguished critics were not interviewed. The Oxburgh panel
did not do as our predecessor committee had been promised, investigate
the science, but only looked at the integrity of the researchers.
With the exception of Professor Kelly's notes other notes taken
by members of the panel have not been published. This leaves a
question mark against whether CRU science is reliable. The Oxburgh
panel also did not look at CRU's controversial work on the IPPC
which is what has attracted most series allegations. Russell did
not investigate the deletion of e-mails. We are now left after
three investigations without a clear understanding of whether
or not the CRU science is compromised.".—(Graham
Stringer.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
Ayes, 1
Graham Stringer
Noes, 3
Gregg McClymont
Stephen Metcalfe
Stephen Mosley
Paragraph 98 agreed to.
Annex and Summary agreed to.
Resolved, That the title
of the Report be changed to the following: The Reviews into
the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit's E-mails.
—(The Chair.)
Resolved, That the Report
be the First Report of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair
make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed
copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the
provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the
House for printing with the Report, together with written evidence
reported and ordered to be published on 14 July, 8 September,
13 October, and 24 November.
Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the
House for placing in the Library and Parliamentary Archives.
[Adjourned till Wednesday 19 January 2011 at 9.10
am
| 
