| 28 January 2009(Click
            here to see the full debate) I
            gave the following speech to the House of Commons during the debate on the expansion of
            Heathrow Airport.  An intervention I made earlier, during the speech of the Shadow
            Secretary of State for Transport, is appended at the end.Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab): I agree with every word said by my
            hon. Friend the Member for Selby (Mr. Grogan), and I will support the motion in the Lobby
            tonight. I agree with him about the need for consensus across all the political parties if
            we are truly to tackle this major global issue of climate change. We came together not so
            long ago and passed the Climate Change Act 2008, and only two hon. Members voted against
            it. We imposed on ourselves strict targets that must be met by 2050, and as a result, the
            Government have been able to claim global leadership in tackling climate change.
 It is one thing to have targets: it is another to achieve them.
            We achieved our Kyoto targets, but that was on the back of a temporary phenomenonthe
            dash for gas and the closure of coal-fired power stations. We are, even now, contemplating
            building a new coal-fired power station, and we are increasing our greenhouse gas
            emissions in this country, as are our partner countries in Europe. So when it comes to
            competition between Heathrow, Paris, Schiphol and Frankfurt, we are all in this together.
            We will all have to take difficult decisions about whether we can continue with the
            predict and provide policy in aviation.
 We
            must also consider the science. When the Climate Change Act was first considered, we had a
            target of 60 per cent., but that was based on out-of-date science. We then realised that
            we needed an 80 per cent. target, based on the report by the intergovernmental panel on
            climate change, which is now some four years out of date. The latest science tells us that
            even that target may not be sufficient. It is not even the target that we need to
            consider, but our trajectory, and how we meet it. We cannot put action off. The latest
            science tells us that we are probably already at the tipping point. Predictions show that
            the melting of the Arctic ocean and ocean acidification, which were not expected to take
            place for another 50 or so years, are taking place now. The target that we must aim for if
            we are to reduce the increase in global temperature to the 2° C necessary to avoid
            catastrophic climate change is now more like 350 parts per millionand that is the
            level that we are at today. We
            have to take urgent action. We cannot wait one or two years: we have to start now. We
            cannot look just for energy efficiencies and otherwise carry on as we are. We cannot look
            to some technological fix, as yet undiscovered. We have technologies that will enable us
            to tackle climate change, and we can be optimistic, but only if we start now. That means
            that all sectors of our economy have to participate. As the chief scientific adviser has
            said, the UKs target means that all sectors must make a major contribution and
            achieve step changes in past performance. That applies to the aviation industry perhaps
            even more than to other emitters of greenhouse gas, because its emissions are made in the
            atmosphere and have a greater impact than those on the ground. It
            is therefore inconceivable that we will meet our climate change targets with a target for
            aviation that says that we will not get back to 2005 levels of emission from the aviation
            sector until 2050. Even if that were achievable in the scenario painted by the Government,
            it is still not good enough. If we do not get it right, and if we do not take a lead in
            this country, as is absolutely necessary if we are to reach agreement at Copenhagen, that
            could have an impact on unemployment and on our economy. It will also have a global
            impact, through the water wars that will take place and the refugee problem. What happened
            in the early 1990swith the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, the consequences that
            followed for refugees seeking asylum, and the impact that that had here, as well as the
            impact that the wars in places such as Somalia and Darfur had herewill be as nothing
            compared with the impacts of dangerous climate change, which we are now embarking on. If
            we are embarking on such change now, we cannot contemplate going ahead with a third runway
            at Heathrow airport. It is as simple as that. If this country wants to offer global
            leadership, it must not go ahead with the project, which makes a mockery of all our claims
            that we are serious about meeting the targets and tackling climate change. We
            can tackle climate changebut what will happen if we do not? I sometimes wonder
            whether I did the right thing by bringing children into this world. I am from the luckiest
            generation. I was born in 1951, after the second world war. I had the benefit of the
            post-war welfare state: health care, free education and a good pension scheme from the
            public sector and from my current employment. When I look at our children, I see that they
            have a lot less opportunity and a lot less to look forward to than I had. If we are going
            to be true to our children, and to children all over the world, we must take climate
            change seriously. That means that we must not go ahead with the third runway at Heathrow. 
 My earlier intervention in the preceding debate
Intervention
            on the Shadow Secretary of State for Transport:
 Mrs. Villiers: I believe very strongly that the economic arguments in favour of
            Heathrow expansion are not convincing, following detailed reflection on them.
 Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab): Will the hon.
            Lady give way? Mrs. Villiers: No, I will not. Lynne Jones: I am trying to help. Mrs. Villiers: All right, then. Lynne Jones: Was it not Keynes who said When the
            evidence changes, I change my mind? I congratulate the hon. Lady on having had a
            change of heart on this issue. I am still unsympathetic towards her view that airport
            expansion is possible in the south-east, but I hope she may come to review that as well. Mrs. Villiers: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for the
            point that she has made.
 
 Click here for more information on Heathrow Expansion
  |