Lib Dem peers propose amendments at day two of report stage debate on the Climate Change Bill

Liberal Democrat Lords have been pushing to increase the strength of the Climate Change Bill, including bringing aviation and shipping into the scope of the Bill.

Baroness Northover highlighted the need for poverty to be taken into account when looking at the international context of climate change.

Baroness Northover explained the reasons for her amendment to consider the effects of climate change, and measures to tackle it, on the poorest people of the world:

“The amendment seeks to make explicit that when the Secretary of State and the climate change committee are looking at the international context, they must consider the impact of their actions on the poorest people in the poorest countries. As we know, climate change will affect those living at the margins first and foremost. That is one of the main reasons why action is so urgent. We already see the impact on fragile countries, and it is disproportionately far greater than in the United Kingdom, which so far has been relatively well cushioned.”

Summarising at the end of the debate, Baroness Northover explained how climate change issues cannot be ring fenced but said, “We are likely to return to this issue later in the Bill, but in the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.”

Click here to read this exchange in full
The amendment was withdrawn

Lord Redesdale pushed to ensure that the Prime Minister is responsible for presenting the climate change report to Parliament, rather than the Environment Secretary.

Lord Redesdale offered Lib Dem support for the cross-party amendment to make the Prime Minister present the climate change report to Parliament:

“In the amendment, we are not asking to overturn the whole remit of collective Cabinet responsibility, but we are asking the Prime Minister to lay the report before the House of Commons, which is quite a different thing. That would give a degree of satisfaction that the Prime Minister was happy with each of the departments’ recommendations and with what they were doing to meet their own commitments, not that there are differences between the different departments. That is quite important, and I believe that it will resonate very well with the country.”

Click here to read this exchange in full
The Lords voted in favour of the amendment, with 194 for and 143 against.

Lord Teverson argued the case for including aviation and later international shipping emissions into the Climate Change Bill.

Lord Teverson, the Liberal Democrat lead environment spokesperson in the House of Lords, explained:

“We accept that this is not an easy area and that the Bill should approach the shipping and aviation industries in different ways. Our amendments would include aviation immediately but delay the inclusion of international shipping for three years. We accept that shipping is a particularly difficult area on which to make calculations. There needs to be a thorough review - we hope within an international context but, ultimately, if it comes to it, not necessarily so - to ensure that we get the shipping figures right. That is why the amendments propose delaying the inclusion of shipping for three years.”

Lord Teverson continued:

“Although internationally aviation counts for only some 2 per cent of emissions, it is, even internationally, one of the highest-growth sectors - something like 5 per cent per annum. Let me put that into context. One transatlantic flight from Heathrow to the United States means an extra 160 tonnes of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Worldwide some 130 million tonnes of fuel are used by the aviation industry per annum and each day there are some 85,000 commercial flights. I go through those statistics because this area cannot be ignored.

“The Government rightly see the control and targeting of greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide in particular, as key to climate change and as something that we should lead on. Therefore, for the sake of the authority of the Bill, both internationally and within the United Kingdom, we cannot leave out the carbon emissions source that has more growth than any other. How can we have a climate change Bill that does not immediately recognise growth in emissions in its largest-growing sector? To me, that takes away the integrity of the Bill, not just in a national but in an international context.”

Click here to read this exchange in full
The Lords voted against the amendment, with 52 for and 169 against.

Lord Teverson then spoke on a Conservative amendment on a similar theme, proposing the inclusion of emissions from international trade within the Bill:

“My Lords, we on these Benches think that the amendment is not as good as it could be. We should be more plain speaking and include aviation and shipping, but we are beyond that debate now.

“It is important that we include in the Bill international movements of people and freight, however that is described or defined, and that this has to happen within a timescale. We need to make sure that there is a duty on the Secretary of State to introduce whatever system is decided upon rather than the matter being left open-ended until some point in the future.”

He said the Liberal Democrats would support the amendment.

Click here to read this exchange in full
The Lordships voted in favour of the amendment, with 191 for and 141 against.