some default text...
Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill First Report


FORMAL MINUTES

Extract from the House of Lords Minutes of Proceedings of Tuesday 27 March 2007

Climate Change — The Lord President (Baroness Amos) moved that it is expedient that a Joint Committee of Lords and Commons be appointed to consider and report on the draft Climate Change Bill presented to both Houses on 13 March 2007 (Cm 7040) and that the Committee should report on the draft Bill by 13 July. The motion was agreed to and a message was sent to the Commons.

Extract from the House of Commons Votes and Proceedings of 18 April 2007

Draft Climate Change Bill (Joint Committee),—Resolved, That this House concurs with the Lords Message of 27th March, that it is expedient that a Joint Committee of Lords and Commons be appointed to consider and report on the draft Climate Change Bill presented to both Houses on 13th March 2007 (Cm. 7040), and that the Committee should report on the draft Bill by 13th July 2007.

Ordered, That a Select Committee of twelve Members be appointed to join with the Committee appointed by the Lords to consider the draft Climate Change Bill.

That the Committee shall have power—

(i) to send for persons, papers and records;

(ii) to sit notwithstanding any adjournment of the House;

(iii) to report from time to time;

(iv) to appoint specialist advisers; and

(v) to adjourn from place to place within the United Kingdom.

That Ms Celia Barlow, Mr David Chaytor, Helen Goodman, Nia Griffith, David Howarth, Mr Nick Hurd, Mr David Kidney, Mark Lazarowicz, Mr Graham Stuart, Dr Desmond Turner, Dr Alan Whitehead and Mr Tim Yeo be members of the Committee.—(Claire Ward.)

Message to the Lords to acquaint them therewith.

Extract from House of Lords Minutes of Proceedings of 23 April 2007

Climate Change — The Chairman of Committees moved that the Commons message of Wednesday 18 April be now considered, and that a Committee of twelve Lords be appointed to join with the Committee appointed by the Commons to consider and report on the draft Climate Change Bill presented to both Houses on 13 March 2007 (Cm 7040);

That, as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the following members be appointed to the Committee:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Puttnam
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds



That the Committee have power to agree with the Committee appointed by the Commons in the appointment of a Chairman;

That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers and records;

That the Committee have power to sit notwithstanding any adjournment of the House;

That the Committee have leave to report from time to time;

That the evidence taken by the Committee shall, if the Committee so wishes, be published;

That the Committee have power to appoint specialist advisers;

That the Committee have power to adjourn from place to place within the United Kingdom;

That the Committee meet with the Committee appointed by the Commons on Wednesday 25 April 2007 at 9.00am in the Boothroyd Room in Portcullis House;

And that, notwithstanding the Resolution of this House of 27 March, the date by which the Joint Committee is required to report should be 25 July 2007 rather than 13 July 2007.

The motion was agreed to.

Extract from House of Commons Votes and Proceedings of 24 April 2007

Draft Climate Change Bill (Joint Committee),—Resolved, That this House concurs with the Lords Message of 23rd April, relating to the Joint Committee of Lords and Commons appointed to consider and report on the draft Climate Change Bill, presented to both Houses on 13th March (Cm. 7040), that—

(1) the Committee appointed by this House do meet the Lords Committee as proposed by their Lordships; and

(2) notwithstanding the Resolution of 18th April, it be an instruction to the Joint Committee on the draft Climate Change Bill that it should report by 25th July 2007.—(Claire Ward.)

Message to the Lords to acquaint them therewith.

Wednesday 25 April 2007

Present


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Puttnam
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP
Helen Goodman MP
David Howarth MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP
Mr David Kidney MP
Mark Lazarowicz MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP




Members' interests: The full lists of Members' interests as recorded in the Commons Register of Members' Interest and the Lords Register of Interests are noted.

It is moved that Lord Puttnam do take the Chair.—(Dr Desmond Turner.)

The same is agreed to.

The Orders of Reference are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Professor Paul Ekins and Mr John Newbigin be appointed as Specialist Advisers to assist the Committee.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 9 May at 2 o'clock.

Wednesday 9 May 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Mr David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP 
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP 
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP 
Dr Alan Whitehead MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 25 April are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Strangers be admitted during the examination of witnesses unless otherwise ordered.

Ordered, That the uncorrected transcripts of evidence given, unless the Committee otherwise order, be published on the internet.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 16 May at half-past One o'clock.

Wednesday 16 May 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Mr David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP 
David Howarth MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP 
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP 
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP




Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 9 May are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CCB 1 to CCB 5 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

Resolved, That the Committee be represented at the Youth Parliament's Newcastle Climate Change Event on 24 My.

The following witnesses are examined:

William Wilson, Director, Cambrensis, and barrister, Environmental Law Unit, Burges Salmon, Christopher Norton, Baker and McKenzie, and Professor Christopher Forsyth, Cambridge University.

Lord Lawson of Blaby and Professor David Henderson, Westminster Business School.

Dr Kevin Anderson, Tyndall Centre, Dr David Griggs, and Dr Chris Gordon, Hadley Centre.

Martin Brough, Oxera, and Richard Gledhill, PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 22 May at half-past 3 o'clock.

Tuesday 22 May 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E of Caithness
L Whitty
L Woolmer
L Crickhowell
L Jay
L Teverson
L May
L Vinson
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Mr David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP 
Nia Griffith MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP 
Mr David Kidney MP




Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 16 May are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CCB6 to CCB13 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

Resolved, That the Joint Committee do visit Oxford, Edinburgh and Woking.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 5 June at half-past 3 o'clock.

Thursday 24 May 2007

Mr David Kidney visited the Youth Parliament's Newcastle Climate Change Event, in accordance with the decision of the Committee of 16 May.

Wednesday 5 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds
Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Mr David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP 
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP 
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Tim Yeo MP




In the absence of the Chairman, Mr Tim Yeo is called to the Chair.

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 22 May are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CCB 14 to CCB 78 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

The following witnesses are examined:

Professor Sir David King KB ScD FRS, Chief Scientific Adviser to HM Government.

Mr Stefan Moser, European Commission, DG Environment.

Lord Crickhowell declared an interest as the father of Mr Rupert Edwards.

Dr Anthony White, MBE, Managing Director of Market Development and Chairman of Advisory, and Mr Rupert Edwards, Managing Director and Head of Portfolio Management, Carbon Markets, Climate Change Capital.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 6 June at 2 o'clock.

Wednesday 6 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds
Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Mr David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP 
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP




In the absence of the Chairman, Mr Tim Yeo is called to the Chair.

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 5 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

The following witnesses are examined:

Mr Brian Samuel, Head of Policy Research, and Mr Dan Staniaszek, Evaluation Director, Energy Saving Trust, Professor Michael Grubb, Carbon Trust, and Mr Steve Smith, Managing Director of Markets, Ofgem.

Lord Whitty declared an interest as a member of the Board of the Environment Agency.

Baroness Young of Old Scone, Chief Executive, and Mr Clive Bates, Head of Environmental Policy, Environment Agency, and Mr Andrew Lee, Director, Sustainable Development Commission.

Mr Stephen Hale, Director, Green Alliance, Mr Martyn Williams, Senior Parliamentary Campaigner, Friends of the Earth, Mr Charlie Kronick, Climate Campaign Manager, Greenpeace, and Dr Keith Allott, WWF-UK.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 12 June at half-past 3 o'clock.

Tuesday 12 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP




Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 6 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memorandum number CCB 79 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

The following witnesses are examined:

Ms Megan Wheatley, UK Business Council for Sustainable Energy, Dr Keith MacLean, Head of Sustainable Development, Scottish and Southern Energy, Mr Ravi Baga, Director of Environment and Market Regulation, EDF Energy, and Mr Philip Wolfe, Chief Executive, Renewable Energy Association.

Michael Roberts, Director, Business Environment, and Gillian Simmonds, Senior Policy Adviser, Energy and Climate Change, CBI, and Mr John Holbrow, Environment Chairman, Federation of Small Businesses.

Mr Dan Skopec, Under-Secretary, Californian Environmental Protection Agency.

Malcolm Wicks MP, Minister of State for Science and Innovation, Lord Truscott, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy, and Peter Brunt, Policy Adviser, Department of Trade and Industry.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 13 June at 2 o'clock.

Wednesday 13 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
L Crickhowell
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Helen Goodman MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 12 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

The following witnesses are examined:

Mr Graham Smith, Senior Vice-President, Toyota Motor Europe, Andrew Barker, Planning Director, easyJet, and Robert Ashdown, Environmental Manager, British Chamber of Shipping.

Gillian Merron MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Adrian Gault, Divisional Manager Transport Analysis and Review and Martin Capstick, Head of Aviation Environmental Division, Department for Transport.

Lord May declared an interest as a member of the Royal Society.

Professor Keith Shine, Head, Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, and Dr Terry Barker, Director, Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research, University of Cambridge, Royal Society, and Dr Sue Ion, Vice-President, Chairman of Standing Committee on Engineering Policy, Royal Academy of Engineering.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 19 June at half-past 3 o'clock.

Friday 15 June 2007

Lord Jay of Ewelme, Lord May, the Earl of Selborne and Lord Whitty visited Oxford, in accordance with the decision of the Committee of 22 May.

Tuesday 19 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
David Chaytor MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP




Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 13 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CCB 82 to CCB 84 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

The following witnesses are examined:

Mr Mark Watts, Policy Adviser to the Mayor, Greater London Authority, and Graham Tubb MBE, Chief Sustainability Advisor, South East England Development Agency.

Ms Tanya Olmeda-Hodge, Head of Environment, and Michael Sayer, CLA member, Country Land and Business Association (CLA).

Dr Martin Gibson, Director, Envirowise.

Lord Whitty declared an interest as Chairman of the National Consumer Council.

Allan Asher, Chief Executive, Energywatch, and Ed Mayo, Chief Executive, National Consumer Council.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 20 June at a quarter to 3 o'clock.

Wednesday 20 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Vinson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 19 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

The following witnesses are examined:

Jonathan Brearley, Director, Office of Climate Change and Robin Mortimer, Head of Draft Climate Change Bill Team, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Rt Hon David Miliband MP, Secretary of State, and Robin Mortimer, Head of Draft Climate Change Bill Team, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and John Healey MP, Financial Secretary, and Chris Taylor, Economic Adviser, HM Treasury.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 26 June at half-past 3 o'clock.

Thursday 21 June 2007

Lord Puttnam, Nia Griffith and Dr Alan Whitehead visited Woking, in accordance with the decision of the Committee of 22 May.

Mark Lazarowicz visited Edinburgh, in accordance with the decision of the Committee of 22 May.

Wednesday 26 June 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
David Chaytor MP
Helen Goodman MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 20 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Thursday 5 July at a quarter to 10 o'clock.

Thursday 5 July 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds
Ms Celia Barlow MP 
Nia Griffith MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Dr Desmond Turner MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Tuesday 26 June are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CCB 86 and CCB 88 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

The following witness is examined:

Dr Lu Xuedu, Deputy Director General, Office of Global Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Science and Technology, People's Republic of China.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Wednesday 18 July at 2 o'clock.

Wednesday 18 July 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
David Chaytor MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr Nick Hurd MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be adjourned to Tuesday 24 July at half-past 3 o'clock.

Tuesday 24 July 2007

Present:


B Billingham
E Caithness
L Crickhowell
L Jay of Ewelme
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E Selborne
L Teverson
L Whitty
L Woolmer of Leeds

Ms Celia Barlow MP 
David Chaytor MP
Nia Griffith MP
David Howarth MP
Mr David Kidney MP 
Mark Lazarowicz MP 
Mr Graham Stuart MP
Dr Desmond Turner MP
Dr Alan Whitehead MP
Mr Tim Yeo MP



Lord Puttnam (in the Chair)

The Order of Adjournment is read.

The proceedings of Wednesday 18 July are read.

The Joint Committee deliberate.

Ordered, That Memoranda numbers CC 89 to 91 and CCB 102 submitted to the Joint Committee be reported to the House for publication on the internet.

A draft Report is proposed by the Chairman.

It is moved that the draft Report before the Committee be read.

The same is agreed to.

Paragraphs 1 to 22 are agreed to.

Paragraph 23 reads follows:

On the other hand, to recast the draft Bill to encompass all greenhouse gases might risk diluting the focus on CO2. It would also raise issues in relation to

  • the treatment of non-greenhouse gas emissions which nevertheless contribute to global warming (eg. the greater impact of high-altitude emissions of water vapour by planes); and
  • whether a single target and trading system should be set across all gases, rather than specific targets and policy instruments for each.

These issues are complex and, in our view, cannot easily or quickly be resolved. Expanding the Bill in this way might therefore jeopardise its coherence and the extent of support which it might command.

It is moved by David Howarth, in line 7 of paragraph 23 to leave out the words from "each" to the end of the paragraph.

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

Paragraph 23 agreed to.

Paragraph 24 reads follows:

We agree with the Government on balance that it is reasonable for the Bill to focus on reducing emissions of carbon dioxide, and we therefore accept its overall architecture. However, this in no way relieves the Government of its responsibility to continue to reduce other greenhouse gases (both by reason of domestic necessity and our international obligations). Accordingly, it is essential to monitor all greenhouse gas emissions, in part so as to provide greater transparency when comparing UK performance against EU and Kyoto targets. We recommend that the Bill should be amended to require both the Government and the Committee on Climate Change to include within their monitoring and reporting a clear analysis of all emissions which contribute to global warming, including non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions. We further recommend that this be done with the explicit intention of providing a stepping stone to a more comprehensive approach to setting targets across the whole range of greenhouse gases, were that approach to emerge as a result of future international negotiations.

It is moved by David Howarth to leave out paragraph 24 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"Despite the complexities of the issue, excluding other greenhouse gases from this legislation is not defensible. International targets are couched in terms of greenhouse gases, as are the Bill's own powers in respect of emissions trading schemes. While it is true that greenhouse gas emissions other than CO2 have fallen since 1990, there is no guarantee that this will remain the case. Furthermore, this is no good reason for excluding them from the 2050 target. The scientific experts who submitted evidence to us made it clear that the omission of greenhouse gases from the Bill was a weakness. We recommend that the Bill be amended to include all greenhouse gases in the emissions reduction target for 2050. If it is thought appropriate to keep the pressure up specifically on carbon, the Committee on Climate Change could advise the Government on what proportion of the emissions reductions should be made in CO2."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

Paragraph 24 agreed to.

Paragraphs 25 to 31 agreed to.

Paragraph 32 reads follows:

The draft Bill currently does not include within the scope of the targets, and the net UK carbon account, emissions from international aviation. We consider this to be a serious weakness which, in view of the significant likely growth of such emissions, has the effect of reducing the credibility of the 60% carbon reduction target. Given the clear expectation of the Secretary of State that international aviation emissions could be included in the net UK carbon account once they are incorporated within the EU ETS, we expect the Government to take all necessary steps to ensure that this is achieved. The draft Bill should be amended in such a way that it requires both the Government and the Committee on Climate Change to include separately international aviation emissions within the scope of their monitoring and reporting, including projections of future emissions - in a manner similar to the parallel reporting we are recommending in relation to non-CO2 greenhouse gases.

It is moved by David Howarth to leave out paragraph 32 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"We note that Mr Moser, from the European Commission, told us "we have seen very strong support from Member States in the Council and also from the Parliament to go ahead and show leadership at the European level, and with your very innovative Bill in the United Kingdom, which again, moves ahead of everybody else, you could give that signal to these two sectors and say they should be included".(Q128) We consider the exclusion of international aviation emissions from the target a serious weakness which reduces the credibility of this legislation. Dr Anderson of the Tyndall Centre suggested that the EU already has a policy in place for apportioning emissions in 2012: we are not convinced by the Government's statements that the issue is too complex to consider. Since international aviation will be included soon, as part of the EU ETS, it is much less disruptive to include international aviation emissions now on a basis that will be close to the final methodology than to include them in one big leap in 2012".

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

Paragraph 32 agreed to.

It is moved by Lord Whitty to insert a new paragraph.

New paragraph agreed to (now paragraph 33).

Paragraph 33 read, amended and agreed to (now paragraph 34).

Paragraphs 34 to 42 agreed to (now paragraphs 35 to 43).

Paragraph 43 read, as follows:

In seeking to balance the arguments over the level of the long-term carbon target, we conclude that the approach adopted by the Government is appropriate and that increasing the target further would, at this stage, only serve to undermine its credibility. We therefore support the 60% target as currently drafted with the proviso that the long title of the Bill should be amended to explicitly state, as the Secretary of State emphasised several times in his evidence to us, that the target should be at least 60% and subject to review.

It is moved by David Howarth to leave out paragraph 43 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"It is clear from the evidence submitted to us that a target carbon reduction of 60% from the 1990 baseline is based on outdated science. The recommendation that this figure is taken from was made in 2000; even the Secretary of State agreed that scientific opinion has moved on since that time. The same factors, including the contraction and convergence method of apportioning emission reduction targets among states, which led the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution to produce a proposed reduction of 60% at that time now suggest that carbon emissions must be reduced by at least 80% to maintain any realistic chance of restricting the global temperature rise to 2°C. We do not think that the considerations of interest groups or industry should outweigh the scientific facts in the mind of Government. We recommend that the Bill be amended to require a carbon reduction of at least 80% by 2050."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

It is moved by Mark Lazarowicz to leave out paragraph 43 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"There are arguments that need to be balanced in deciding upon the level of the long-term carbon target. Bearing in mind, however, the weight of scientific evidence before the committee that a target of significantly more than 60% is likely to be necessary, we believe that before the introduction of the definitive Climate Change Bill, the government should review the latest scientific evidence available and consider whether to what extent the target should be raised above 60%. We believe that the 'shadow' Committee on Climate Change should be asked to carry out such a review with a view to making recommendations on the appropriate long-term target before the Bill completes its passage through Parliament."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
Mark Lazarowicz
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

It is moved by David Kidney to leave out paragraph 43 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"We understand, and sympathise with, the argument in favour of setting a higher target for the long-term reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. But recognizing how very demanding the target set out in the draft Bill for 2050 is, and facing up to both the complexity of domestic budgeting and international requirements, we conclude that the approach adopted by the Government is appropriate provided that it is understood that this is but the first step along a path towards a low-carbon future for the UK. We make further recommendations later about reinforcing this direction of travel. We also recommend that the long title of the Bill should be amended to state explicitly, as the Environment Secretary of State emphasised several times in his evidence to us, that the target should be at least 60% and subject to review."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson



New Paragraph accordingly agreed to (now paragraph 44).

It is moved by Dr Alan Whitehead to insert a new paragraph.

Paragraph agreed to (now paragraph 45).

Paragraphs 44 to 63 read and agreed to (now paragraphs 46 to 65).

Paragraph 64 read, as follows:

While we accept that a system of statutory targets based on five-year budgets appears reasonable, we do have a number of concerns. First, it will inevitably be the case that external organisations will analyse future budgetary targets and calculate the proposed trajectory in terms of annual emissions. These figures would become de facto annual targets. Rather than leave this process to external forces, it would be preferable for the Government to agree indicative annual milestones, based on the advice of the Committee on Climate Change, against which performance could be assessed. This would also assist both the Government and those scrutinising its work to check that progress towards the five-year targets is satisfactory.

It is moved by Lord Teverson to leave out paragraph 64 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"However we do not accept that a system of statutory targets should be based on five-year budgets. A period as long as this stretches beyond most Parliamentary terms and even with annual targets gives too long a period before there is any risk of substantial sanction. From industry's point of view the most important aspect is that of certainty of Government intent. A five-year timescale allows, even with annual targets, for Governments to relax for the first couple of years until the end of the budget period comes closer. We therefore believe that budget periods should be three years. A three year period is also in line with Government Comprehensive Spending Reviews which is particularly relevant given the importance of Treasury decisions in terms of environmental and carbon taxation, and also the introduction of specific UK emission trading systems and auctions."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L Puttnam
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

Paragraph 64 agreed to (now paragraph 66).

Paragraphs 65 and 66 agreed to (now paragraphs 67 and 68).

Paragraph 67 reads follows:

We support the proposed system of five-yearly budgets provided there is a strong system of annual reporting on progress. We recommend that, in setting the level of future budgets, the Government should also provide indicative annual milestones to help assess progress on an annual basis. More generally, we would be concerned if the budgetary period were lengthened to maintain alignment with international reporting and emissions trading periods, given that this could reduce the frequency of the Government's strategy reports and outturn assessments. Clause 12(4) gives the Secretary of State power to make "necessary or expedient" amendments to the proposed Act where the length of the budgetary period is altered in line with similar periods under any international agreement. We recommend that the draft Bill compels the Secretary of State to make an order under Clause 12(4) that requires strategy reports under Clause 6 to be prepared at least every five years in the event that the existing five-yearly budget period is lengthened. The Government's desire to maintain this alignment appears to be based on an expectation that emissions trading and the use of foreign credits will provide a substantial proportion of the effort required to achieve UK carbon reduction targets.

It is moved by Lord Teverson in line 10, to leave out the words from "agreement" to "The" in line 13 and insert the words "We recommend that any lengthening of the budget term should require primary legislation".

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L May of Oxford
L Teverson
L Puttnam
L Whitty
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E of Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
E Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Woolmer



The amendment is disagreed to accordingly.

Paragraph 67 agreed to (now paragraph 69).

Paragraphs 68 to 92 read and agreed to (now paragraphs 70 to 94).

Paragraphs 93 to 95 read follows:

There was a level of opposition to the power to borrow up to 1% of the emissions from the subsequent budget. The Association of British Insurers stated, "The ability to 'borrow' against future periods should be limited to excessive emissions caused by external shocks (such as severe weather). Banking and borrowing should be limited to a rolling five-year period with the year in question as the central point. This would enable smoothing where there is genuine need, without opening up the danger of constant deferment but encouraging investment and early action in anticipation of subsequent shocks."

The Environment Agency stated, "[w]e do not support borrowing, even at the limited levels envisaged in the Bill. Any additional emissions reductions needed in the current budget period should be met from purchasing international credits in the current budget period, not from a transfer of additional burdens to a subsequent period." The Mayor of London was also against any form of borrowing between budgets.

The Environmental Industries Commission suggested that any exercise of the power to borrow should be subject to a detailed explanation by the Secretary of State: "In the event that borrowing becomes necessary to meet the carbon budget, EIC believe that there should be a legally binding obligation on the Government to explain to Parliament why such borrowing was needed and what action has been taken to remedy the situation." Given the fact that the entire purpose of the five-year budgetary period itself is to smooth out variations, we are somewhat surprised that the Government feels the need to include any borrowing provision at all. We therefore recommend that this provision be deleted from the draft Bill.

It is moved by Mark Lazarowicz to leave out paragraphs 93 to 95 and insert a new paragraph as follows:

"The draft Bill currently allows the Government to borrow up to 1% of the current budgetary amount from the next period in order to avoid missing its target by a very small amount. The Government explained in evidence that it regarded the borrowing provisions as a minimalist measure designed simply to prevent the Government from missing its target by a very small amount, due to an unexpected variation in weather patterns in the final year of the budgetary period, or as a result of small changes in validating data. Ministers also clearly confirmed that the 1% borrowing proposal is not cumulative. There was little specific comment to us on the borrowing provision, and there appeared to be a general acceptance of the government approach. We therefore consider that the borrowing provision should be retained in the Bill."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham
Mr David Chaytor
L Crickhowell
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
E of Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer
E of Caithness
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
L Puttnam



Paragraph accordingly agreed to (now paragraph 95).

Paragraph 96 agreed to.

Paragraph 97 read, amended and agreed to.

Paragraph 98 reads as follows:

However, there remains a possibility that a Government could purchase carbon credits cheaply in one period to offset against emissions incurred in the following budgetary period. Indeed, the complete collapse in price of Phase 1 EU ETS allowances demonstrates how easily this could now be done. While we support the principle of banking of domestic over-achievement for use in a subsequent budgetary period, we recommend that the draft Bill be amended so as to place a limit on the extent to which carbon credits can be banked for use in this way.

It is moved by David Howarth in line 4 of paragraph 98, to leave out the words "done" to the end of the paragraph and add the words: "We are not persuaded that allowing the banking of credits should be allowed under any circumstances".

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
David Howarth
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Teverson
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E of Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
L Crickhowell 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
L Puttnam
E of Selborne
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer



Amendment accordingly disagreed to.

Paragraph 98 agreed to.

Paragraphs 99 to 114 agreed to.

Paragraph 115 reads as follows:

We are not persuaded that Clauses 1(1) and 2(1)(b) impose a legally enforceable duty on the Secretary of State to "ensure" reductions in carbon emissions for the period up to 2050. We question the wisdom of Parliament approving legislation in a form that does not make enforceable law, and could be regarded as a 'political gesture'. Were there to be a perception that the 'statutory' regime has no legal force, there is a consequential danger that, instead of the Bill creating confidence in the UK's climate change policy and establishing a leading legal framework, these aims could undermined and weakened.

It is moved by Lord Whitty in line 1 of paragraph 115 to leave out the words from the start of line 1 to "duty" in line 2 and insert "We have serious concerns regarding the legal enforceability of Clauses 1(1) and 2(1)(b), which impose a".

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E of Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Puttnam
E of Selborne
L Teverson
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
L Woolmer
L Crickhowell 
David Howarth



Amendment accordingly agreed to.

It is moved by Mark Lazarowicz to leave out paragraph 115, as amended, and replaced with the following new paragraph:

"We have concerns regarding the legal enforceability of Clauses 1(1) and 2(1)(b), which impose a duty on the Secretary of State to ensure targets and budgets are met. We believe, therefore, that these provisions need to be altered or strengthened."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
Mr David Chaytor 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L Puttnam
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
E of Caithness
L Crickhowell 
David Howarth
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
E of Selborne
L Teverson
L Woolmer



Paragraph agreed to (now paragraph 115).

Paragraph 116 agreed to.

Paragraph 117 reads as follows:

An alternative, which is our strong preference, is to introduce a compliance mechanism within the Bill that will give both meaning and strength to the duty to "ensure" by compelling the Secretary of State to redress any failure to meet a target or budget, where necessary through court intervention based on the compliance mechanism. There are appropriate compliance mechanisms that can be introduced to fulfil this role and we address this issue below.

It is moved by Lord Crickhowell to leave out paragraph 117 and replace it with the following paragraphs:

"An alternative approach, which we favour, would be to combine a Purpose Clause of a kind that is common in UK legislation with Clause 2 imposing duties over a succession of five-year periods which the Secretary of State and the Government have the capacity to fulfil, and which in some circumstances might be judiciable, combined with compliance measures of the kind that we describe in paras [x] below.

A possible alternative to the present draft Clause 1(1) would be: "It is the duty of the Secretary of State to set targets, and prepare proposals and policies to achieve five-year carbon budgets with the object of ensuring that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 60% lower than the 1990 baseline". With this Purpose Clause as an indication of intent, the preparation of carbon budgets set in accordance with Clause 2, the duty of the Secretary of State to report to Parliament on proposals and policies (Clause 6), together with the annual statement of UK emissions (Clause 7) and a Kyoto type Compliance Mechanism deducting excess emissions from a carbon budget for a subsequent period (see para [x] below) would put more pressure on the Government to deliver than would be the result of imposing an unenforceable duty to deliver an outcome of more than 40 years in the future."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
L Crickhowell
L Woolmer
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
E of Caithness 
Mr David Chaytor 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Mark Lazarowicz
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Puttnam
E of Selborne
L Teverson
Dr Desmond Turner
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty



Amendment accordingly disagreed to.

Paragraph 117 agreed to.

Paragraphs 118 to 122 agreed to.

Paragraph 123 reads as follows:

It would not be difficult to introduce an action plan procedure into the existing framework of the draft Bill. In effect, it would simply extend the duty to report on policies and proposals under Clause 6. More significantly it would, in the opinion of Professor Forsyth and Mr Wilson, impose a duty that is sufficiently precise to allow the court to compel its preparation and, potentially, implementation following a judicial review. For these reasons, we recommend that failure by the Government to meet a carbon budget or an annual benchmark should trigger a duty to prepare a report explaining the reasons for the non-compliance and an action plan for remedying the situation.

It is moved by Lord Whitty at the end of paragraph 123 to add the words "The action plan should cover any necessary policy changes, legislative proposals and resources need to implement it; any public funds identified should be paid into a 'climate change compliance fund'."

Question put, That the Amendment be made.

Objected to; on Question?


ContentsNot Contents
E of Caithness
Mr David Chaytor
L Crickhowell
David Howarth
L May of Oxford
B Miller of Chilthorne Domer
L Puttnam
E of Selborne
L Teverson
Dr Alan Whitehead
L Whitty
Ms Celia Barlow
B Billingham 
Nia Griffith
Mr David Kidney
Dr Desmond Turner



Amendment accordingly agreed to.

Paragraph 123, as amended, agreed to.

Paragraphs 124 to 228 agreed to.

The Abstract is agreed to.

The following annexes to the Report are agreed to:

    List of acronyms used in the Report

    Summary of online consultation

    Note on visits undertaken by the Committee

    Analysis of costs of the Committee on Climate Change

    Schedule of comments on the draft Bill.

The Committee agreed that the draft Report, as amended, be the report of the Joint Committee.

Ordered, That certain papers be appended to the Minutes of Evidence.

Ordered, That the provisions of Standing Order 134 (Select Committee Reports) of the House of Commons apply to the report.

Ordered, That the Chairman make the report to the House of Lords and Dr Desmond Turner make the report to the House of Commons.

Ordered, That the Joint Committee be now adjourned.




 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 3 August 2007