Lord Sheldon asked Her Majesty's Government:
What comparison they have made of the consequences of climate change for the United Kingdom and for other countries.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Bach): My Lords, climate change is obviously a global issue. The United Kingdom is giving increasing attention to understanding climate change impacts on both the UK and other countries, particularly developing countries, to help them assess their vulnerability. Last year, Defra funded a global assessment of climate change impacts by sector. This report highlighted that the most severe negative effects are most likely to occur in less developed countries and that up to 70 per cent of the world's coastal wetlands could be lost by the 2080s.
Lord Sheldon: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Although climate change could have serious consequences for many countries, is it not likely that its effect on Britain would be rather less severe? In such a situation, should we be taking such a prominent position ahead of those countries which are considered so much more at risk of global warming?
Lord Bach: My Lords, it is certainly right that climate change may lead to some positive consequences for the United Kingdom but they are likely to be negated by the negative consequences which will affect this country as well. We are right to be extremely cautious indeed about seeing any real positive advantages in climate change for the United Kingdom. There is a balance to be struck. We feel that it is essential to look after the interests of the United Kingdom so far as climate change is concerned, but it is also in our interests to make sure that developing countries, in particular, are protected as much as they can be and are able to deal with climate change over the years to come. The world is becoming smaller and smaller and the consequences of some disaster occurring in Bangladesh, for example, will very much affect Britain and its citizens.
Lord Lawson of Blaby: My Lords, is the Minister aware that there is increasing evidence that adaptation to any problems of climate change—whether man made or natural—is far more cost effective than attempts at mitigation, which cannot work if they are not carried out on a global basis, which, of course, they
30 Nov 2005 : Column 208
are not? The Minister referred to the issue of rising sea levels but is he aware that the problem could be more effectively met by improved sea defences? This would be a much more sensible use of funds than the vast amounts that are being spent in a doomed attempt to mitigate the effects of climate change.
Lord Bach: My Lords, until recently there has been, as the noble Lord is implying, more emphasis on mitigation and financial incentives for mitigation than on adaptation. But the balance is now shifting towards adapting to climate change. For example, Defra has commissioned research on assessing the costs of adaptation options both for ourselves and for other countries.
Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that carbon emissions are making a major contribution to climate change? Will he therefore confirm that his department and the Ministers within it are now enthusiastic supporters of the recent announcement made by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister?
Lord Bach: My Lords, we are always enthusiastic supporters of any pronouncement by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, but in this case particularly so.
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if we called it "global chilling", people in England might be more worried than they are generally, because the idea of warming is quite cosy? Further, I am sure that the Minister is aware of yesterday's report from the National Farmers Union on the effects of climate change on agriculture. What are the Government doing to ensure the capacity of the UK to feed itself and the future of food production in the face of climate change?
Lord Bach: My Lords, we are aware of the NFU document, which is an important contribution to a debate that has taken off in the past year or so. We are of course concerned that climate change may affect the way in which British agriculture is conducted, so, along with the National Farmers Union and other interested bodies, we are researching what we can do to anticipate as best we can what we will be farming in years to come. This is an important matter and the noble Baroness is right when she implies that the consequences for the United Kingdom can be pretty severe.
Lord Tanlaw: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that there is no problem with the possible stoppage of the Gulf stream and the very dramatic effect that that would have on the northern latitudes, particularly Scotland, were it to occur, as some scientists believe it might?
Lord Bach: My Lords, for a variety of reasons, it would be a very serious matter if that was to occur.
30 Nov 2005 : Column 209
That would affect not just the United Kingdom but the continent of Europe. One does not know whether that will happen but it is clearly a danger.
Lord Dixon-Smith: My Lords, economic modelling appears to indicate that in developed economies, the cost of switching from a high-carbon emissions economy to a low-carbon emissions economy is relatively small in the context of the overall economic situation. Have the Government undertaken any studies of what will happen in less developed economies, where the situation is remarkably different, to see whether the same, relatively neutral, effect applies there? If that were the case, it would be so much easier to persuade those countries to take action on global warming.
Lord Bach: My Lords, I appreciate the noble Lord's question, but we have to take notice of the wish and requirement of developing countries to grow. It is all very well for us in the developed countries that enjoy a very high standard of living to be self-righteous about climate change and say what we can do to mitigate or adapt to it, but it would not be acceptable for developing countries to stop growing because of climate change. That is why we support the idea that there should be discussions between the developed countries and those developing countries, particularly China and India, which are not signed up to Kyoto. What we need to tackle the global problem is global action. We are driving forward a complementary approach to formal target-setting. These matters are being discussed at Montreal as we speak.
Lord Davies of Coity: My Lords, I wonder whether my noble friend—
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Rooker): My Lords, we must move on because we are now in the ninth minute.
Baroness Pitkeathley My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare an interest as a survivor of MRSA.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their response to reports that tests for methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) may be falsely positive as a result of using a single laboratory.
The Minister of State, Department of Health (Lord Warner): My Lords, I am sure that the whole House congratulates my noble friend on that.
Laboratories doing microbiological investigations should be accredited or registered for accreditation. Tests must be undertaken in accordance with
30 Nov 2005 : Column 210
approved standards and operating procedures. The results should be validated by process controls, internal quality control and participation in an external quality assurance program. It is disappointing that test results for MRSA produced by unsound methods are given wide publicity in the media. This causes unnecessary public concern and wastes NHS resources in countering them.
Baroness Pitkeathley: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that helpful reply. Does he agree that the continued use of one particular laboratory, which has questionable qualifications and results, by the tabloid press shows more interest in criticising the NHS than in reporting the facts? Is he further concerned that this particular laboratory appears to derive most of its income from selling disinfectants to combat MRSA and thus might perhaps be seen to have a vested interest in achieving positive results?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |