One speech in the debate stood out, by Caroline Lucas, the only Green Party MP in Parliament ( there are two Green Party peers).Below I have compiled the Environment Secretary Theresa Villiers' opening remarks in the debate, and Caroline Lucas' important intervention in this speech, along with the whole of her own important contribution to the debate.
The Climate Emergency
17
October 2019
Volume
666
1.41 pm
It is a great honour to open today’s debate on Her
Majesty’s Gracious Speech. A cornerstone of the legislative programme set out
in that speech is a landmark Environment Bill. The Bill will help us to make
good our pledge to bequeath the environment in a better state than it was left
to us, and it will play a crucial part in our efforts to meet the commitment
made to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050.
Leaving the EU is an historic opportunity for us to set
our own course, and this Government are determined that this will include
stepping up action to address both climate change and the decline of nature and
biodiversity. These hugely important environmental issues of our time are two
sides of the same coin; we cannot protect biodiversity without stabilising the
climate, and we cannot tackle climate change without saving the wildlife and
habitats that provide crucial life-giving carbon sinks. The trees, plants and
peatlands that make up nature’s very own carbon capture technology will become
ever more important as we strive to bear down further on emissions to meet the
net zero target….
I am grateful for the opportunity just to say how wholeheartedly
I support my right hon. Friend in what she is doing, particularly in the
environmental space. Does she agree that the ability to take the leadership
that the UK has demonstrated in so many areas to the rest of the world in the
absolutely critical conference of the parties next year will help us to sell
the benefits of the green transition and persuade every other country in the
world to lift their eyes to the green prize?
My right hon. Friend makes a hugely important point, and
I wholeheartedly agree and will return to it in a few moments.
We have committed to building on the record of success I
have outlined, and we will accelerate the low-carbon growth that already
provides more than 400,000 jobs in the United Kingdom. For example, we are
supporting clean growth with investment of more than £3 billion in research and
development. As we look ahead to the date when we end the sale of new petrol
and diesel cars, we are generating £2.7 billion in exporting ultra-low emission
vehicles. One in five battery electric cars sold in Europe was built right here
in this country.
A decade on from the landmark Climate Change Act 2008,
which enshrined ambition in law and marshalled action across society, we are
forging ahead with legislation for the second great environmental task: nature
recovery.
I want to take the Secretary of State back to the
Environment Bill for two seconds, because it is important to set targets but
even more important to have deadlines for meeting them. She will be aware of
concerns raised today that there is a major loophole in the Bill that will
essentially give the Government nearly two decades to meet the legally binding
future environmental targets. Will she comment on those concerns? It is all
very well setting targets by 2022, but not having to meet them for 15 years
seems absurd.
I can reassure the hon. Lady by drawing her attention to
clause 10, which provides for interim targets. The OEP will also have the
authority to hold the Government to account on our progress towards meeting
long-term targets.
Taking on board the recommendations of the Select
Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and of the Environmental Audit
Committee, the Bill extends the OEP’s proposed remit to climate change….
3.07 pm
There is so little time that I will just make one main
point, and it is a very simple one: the Government should tell the truth on the
climate crisis. Telling the truth on climate is one of the demands of
Extinction Rebellion and the youth climate strikers. These are strange times
indeed when telling the truth is a radical act, and yet on this issue, that is
exactly what it is.
We could make a start by telling the truth about our
climate record. Ministers regularly claim that greenhouse gas emissions have
fallen in the UK by 42% since 1990. But that is not the whole truth, because
the Government’s own figures show that if we calculate emissions based on
consumption over the past 20 years, our emissions have fallen by just 10%. That
is relevant to the comparison with China made by the right hon. Member for
Newbury (Richard Benyon), completely overlooking the fact that many of China’s
emissions are linked to producing goods that we then import. Of course, if we
simply outsource our manufacturing, it is not surprising that our emissions
appear to go down, but that is not a globally just and responsible attitude to
emissions reduction.
What is more, historical reductions are no indicator of
future progress. Coal is all but gone from the power sector, which means that
the biggest source of reduction so far has now been exhausted, and there is
little sign of the policy required to ensure that the necessary reductions
continue.
The UK was the first member of the G7 to legislate for a
net zero emissions target. I welcome that, of course, but other countries have
more ambitious goals. Norway has committed to net zero by 2030, Finland by
2035, Iceland by 2040 and Sweden by 2045. My point is that 2050 is not global
leadership. In an emergency, you do not dial 999 and ask for the emergency
services to come in 30 years’ time; you want them to come now, because the
emergency is now.
A target on its own does not bring down emissions—action
does. What does the Committee on Climate Change say about the Government’s
actual actions? In one of its most recent progress reports to Parliament, it
states that
“actions to date have fallen short of what is needed for
the previous targets and well short of those required for the net-zero target”.
The Government of course know it, because their own
projections show that we do not have policy in place to meet the fourth and
fifth carbon budgets and that the gap to meeting them is getting wider.
That matters not least because what is scientifically
relevant is not just reaching net zero, but the amount of carbon emitted before
we reach it. The most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate
of the available global carbon budget for a 66% chance of remaining within 1.5°
of warming is 420 gigatonnes of CO2. Professor Tim Jackson from the University of Surrey has
estimated that the UK’s fair share of that remaining budget is just 2.5
gigatonnes. On current reduction trends, our production-based emissions will
exceed our fair budget in 2026—in just seven years’ time. Using
consumption-based accounting, which I have argued is a fairer way of doing it,
we would actually exhaust our available budget in 2023—in just four years’
time. That means reaching net zero is not enough; we need deep carbon
reductions in the next few years to stand a chance of staying within a safe and
fair budget.
When the Government claim that they are acting with the
required urgency, I think we need to bear in mind these stronger figures. When
they say that they are going to bring forward action, we need to say that we
need that action now. For example, they say they have a document on transport
coming up, but we want action now: bring forward the ban on the sale of petrol
cars and end aviation expansion now.
No comments:
Post a Comment