The Climate Change Debate
April 2010
My
very last words in Parliament were on Thursday 8 April during oral questions to the
Secretary of State at the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), when
I raised the need to ensure that our current focus on tacking the fiscal deficit
should not detract us from the equaliy important issue of the "environmental
deficit" that we have created as a result of our unsustainable lifestyles:
Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab):
Humankind is borrowing from the earth's capital at a rate that threatens the very
viability of our planet. Although we do not yet have an agreed currency for the
environmental deficit, does the Secretary of State agree that tackling that deficit is as
vital as tackling the fiscal deficit? How are we doing in this country in meeting Lord
Stern's
8 Apr 2010 : Column 1177
recommendation that we should have a carbon constraint on the economy equivalent to 2 per
cent. of GDP if costs are not to be even higher in the long run?
Edward Miliband:
Let me pay tribute to my hon. Friend, who is standing down. We did not always agree on
every issue, but she pursued the issues that she cared about passionately and with great
idealism. She asked about carbon constraint. We are living at the moment as if there were
three planets on which to live, rather than one. That sums up our excessive use of carbon
in this country. Carbon budgets are an important step forward in constraining what we do,
Department by Department and sector by sector.
During
the previous DECC Question Time on 25 February, I had raised the
issue of climate change research and the strength of the scientific case for man-made
climate change :
:
Lynne Jones (Birmingham,
Selly Oak) (Lab): What recent research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated into
the scientific case for man-made climate change; and if he will make a statement. [318555]
The Minister of State,
Department of Energy and Climate Change (Joan Ruddock): Last year, DECC and the
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs launched the AVOID research programme
on avoiding dangerous climate change which assessed the scientific research published
since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's fourth assessment report. The
findings informed the UK delegation ahead of Copenhagen. The integrated climate programme
at the Met Office Hadley centre is also providing new climate science research and expert
advice on the findings of that research.
Lynne
Jones: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. In this country, there has been
a broad consensus that the risk of dangerous climate change is real. It is based on broad
and deep scientific evidence, with acknowledged uncertainties, that we cannot go on
pumping billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere without serious adverse
effects. Does she agree that, if we are to continue to take the right decisions for the
long term, it is important that that political consensus is maintained, and that we should
not be distracted by the noise being made by those who claim that climate change is not a
serious risk?
Joan
Ruddock: I agree absolutely with my hon. Friend. We have seen nothing that undermines
the main body of climate research, which goes back many decades and has involved some of
the best scientists in the world. Although it is clear that there have been some errors
and possible misjudgments, we know that CO2 emissions in the atmosphere are growing at an
unprecedented rate. We have every reason to accept that that is the result of human
activities. I am pleased that the consensus that it is human activities that are leading
to the excessive warming that we see, and to the other climatic effects that we associate
with climate change, holds across this House.
As evidence of cross
party consensus on this issue, see also the following questions asked on the same day by
Tom Baldry, Conservative MP, and Dr Evan Harris, Liberal Democrat MP:
Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con): Will the Secretary of State make
every effort to republish and promulgate the conclusions of the Stern review, which make
very clear the huge cost to our children and grandchildren if we do not take action now to
tackle climate change? The costs will be huge and fall heavily on future generations.
Edward Miliband: The hon. Gentleman makes a point that is
central to this debate. We need to be open about the fact that there are costs to acting
on climate change, but we know that the costs of not acting would be greater. That central
conclusion of the Stern report is important in shaping the climate change debate, and he
is right that we should emphasise it.
Dr. Evan Harris (Oxford, West and Abingdon) (LD):
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [ Interruption. ] I
come hot-foot from a meeting at your office, Sir. Does the Secretary of State agree that
despite the controversy over the university of East Anglia e-mails, the science is very
clear, not least from other data sets, that global warming is a real effect, and that we
should not be distracted by this controversy from insisting on our policies? *
Edward Miliband: I congratulate the hon.
Gentleman on his just-in-time questioning. He raises an important issue. Clearly, mistakes
have been made, and it is important that those are looked at and that the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change looks at its procedures. I have written to Dr.
Pachauri to emphasise our support for the organisation, but also our wish that it looks at
its procedures to try to eliminate such errors. The overall picture is very clear: climate
change is happening, it is real, and it is man-made. It is very important to say that.
I hope that this cross-party concensus continues. The science on climate
change remains fundamentally sound despite the doubts generated by, for
example, the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia (the Science
and Tecnology Select Committee has produced a report on this issue http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/387i.pdf ).
After my retirement from Parliament I intend to continue to work with SusMo
for a more sustainable community where I live and I will be keeping a close eye on the
work of the next Government in the fight against dangerous climate change.
* Evan Harris uses the term ‘global
warming’ but, in my view, the term ‘climate change’ more accurately
describes the phenomena as, if we reach any of
the possible tipping point s
(defined as the
critical threshold when even a small change caused by human activity can have dramatic
effects) the UK may experience a
substantial reduction in temperatures.
For more information on climate change click
here.
To read the Stern Review Report on the
Economics of Climate Change click here: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm
