United Kingdom Climate Change Bill

The Climate Change Bill, published on 13 March 2007, is a draft law aimed at moving the United Kingdom to a low-carbon economy and society. The bill was introduced as a result of strong pressure from environmental groups. [cite web|url=http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1930736,00.html|title= Ministers bow to pressure for climate bill|publisher=Guardian Unlimited
date=2006-10-25|accessdate=2007-03-13] [cite web|url=http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/news/climate_bill.html|title=Climate Change Bill off to a flying start|publisher=Friends of the Earth|accessdate=2007-03-13] [Edinburgh Students lobby MPs and MSPs on climate bill http://peopleandplanet.org/navid3211]

The Bill when enacted would give ministers power to introduce the emissions reduction measures necessary to achieve the goals, including personal carbon trading [ [http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7040/7040.pdf Draft Climate Change Bill Consultation Document, Paragraphs 5.72-5.76] ] . An independent Committee on Climate Change would be created to provide advice. Environment Secretary Hilary Benn has asked the fledgling Committee to see if a 80 percent carbon reduction was feasible. [ [http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/45372/story.htm Planet Ark : Britain Publishes Climate Change Bill ] ]

Carbon emissions target

The target of cutting carbon emissions by 60% has been a Government ambition for some years. The 60% figure was adopted based on the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, made in their June 2000 report "Energy - The Changing Environment". [cite web
url=http://www.rcep.org.uk/news/00-2.htm
title=Royal Commission calls for transformation in the UK's use of energy
publisher=Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution
date=2000-06-16
accessdate=2007-03-14] If adopted by other countries too, a 60% cut by 2050 was thought likely to limit atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations to no more than 550 parts per million which, it was generally thought at the time, would probably prevent global temperatures from rising by more than 2°C (3.6°F) and so avoid the most serious consequences of global warming. The Royal Commission went on to say that there should be an 80% cut by 2100, and that the 550 ppm upper limit should be 'kept under review'. [cite web
url=http://www.rcep.org.uk/newenergy.htm
title=Royal Commission report: 'Energy - The Changing Environment' chapters 10 & 4
publisher=Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution
date=2000-06-16
accessdate=2007-03-14] They restated the importance of this in January 2006. [cite web
url=http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news.asp?year=&id=4121
title=Government needs to keep carbon dioxide target under review to avoid dangerous climate change
publisher=The Royal Society
date=2006-01-30
accessdate=2007-03-16]

The Royal Commission's figures were based on a June 1996 decision of the EU Council of Ministers to limit emissions to 550 ppm, contained in their "Community Strategy on Climate Change". [cite web
url=http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/envir/011a0006.htm
title=Community Strategy on Climate Change - Council Conclusions
publisher=Council of the European Union
date=1996-06-22?
accessdate=2007-03-15] This, in turn, was based on the 1995 IPCC Second Assessment Report, which first mentioned the 550 ppm - 2°C connection.

A scientific assessment at the 2005 international "Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change" conference, held in Exeter under the UK presidency of the G8, [cite web
url=http://www.gnn.gov.uk/content/detail.asp?NewsAreaID=2&ReleaseID=134475
title=Climate Stabilisation Conference - Exeter 2005
publisher=Government News Network
date=2004-11-04
accessdate=2007-03-15] concluded that at the level of 550 ppm it was likely that 2°C would be exceeded, based on the projections of more recent climate models. Stabilising greenhouse gas concentrations at 450 ppm would only result in a 50% likelihood of limiting global warming to 2°C, and that it would be necessary to achieve stabilisation below 400 ppm to give a relatively high certainty of not exceeding 2°C. [cite web
url=http://www.stabilisation2005.com/outcomes.html
title=International Symposium on the Stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations - Report of the International Scientific Steering Committee
publisher=Met Office
date=2005-05-10
accessdate=2007-03-15]

Based on the current rate of increase - averaging about 2 ppm per year [cite web
url=http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
title=Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
publisher=National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
date=
accessdate=2007-03-17] - greenhouse gas concentrations are likely to reach 400 ppm by 2016, 450 ppm by 2041, and 550 ppm by around 2091. It is because of this that environmental organisations and some political parties have criticised the 60% target as being insufficiently ambitious, and why they are demanding greater cuts (80%-100%), as mentioned below. The exclusion of emissions from aviation and shipping, combined with forecasts for growth in these areas, also means that the net effect of the bill would actually only be a 35-50% total cut on 1990 levels by 2050. [cite web
url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmenvaud/233/23305.htm#a11
title=Select Committee on Environmental Audit Third Report
publisher=House of Commons
date=
accessdate=2007-04-20]

Legislative progress

The procedure for enacting legislation in the United Kingdom Parliament sometimes involves numerous consultative and debating stages.

Previous Bill

The current Climate Change Bill was preceded by a Private Member's Bill of the same name [cite web|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pabills/200506/climate_change.htm|title= 2005 Climate Change Bill
publisher=United Kingdom Parliament|accessdate=2007-03-13] drafted by Friends of the Earth and brought before Parliament on 7 April 2005. Although it received widespread support [cite web
url=http://www.epolitix.com/EN/Legislation/200507/86622a91-d7f8-44b0-a6d7-032c64f3c778.htm
title=Failed 2005 Climate Change Bill
publisher=ePolitix.com
date=2007-03-14
accessdate=2007-03-14] the Bill was unable to make progress as Parliament was dissolved ahead of the 2005 general election.

Early Day Motion

Shortly after the 2005 general election, 412 of the 646 Members of Parliament signed an early day motion calling for a Climate Change Bill to be introduced, to include a requirement for 3% annual cuts in carbon emissions. [cite web
url=http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=28373
title=Early day motion 178 - Climate Change
publisher=Michael Meacher, MP
date=2005-05-24
accessdate=2007-03-15] Only three other early day motions had ever been signed by more than 400 MPs. [cite web
url=http://www.southhamsfoe.co.uk/node/168
title=October update on the Climate Change Bill
publisher=South Hams Friends of the Earth
date=2006-06-12
accessdate=2007-03-15]

Joint Committee

The Labour Government announced the introduction of a Climate Change Bill in the Speech from the Throne, on 15 November 2006. [cite web|url=http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1948346,00.html|title=Climate change bill to balance environmental and energy concerns|publisher=Guardian Unlimited|date=2006-11-15|accessdate=2007-03-13] The draft Bill was published on 13 March 2007, but proposed five year 'carbon budgets' rather than the annual targets many had called for. The Government believe that varying weather conditions make annual targets impractical. [cite web
url=http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,2032710,00.html
title=Climate change bill is revolutionary, says Blair
publisher=Guardian Unlimited
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-15]

A Joint Select Committee of 24 members from the House of Lords and the House of Commons, chaired by Lord Puttnam, was immediately established to scrutinize the Bill. [cite web|url=http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/climatechange.cfm|title=Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill - official website|accessdate=2007-11-29] It received evidence from a series of interested parties between May and July and cast votes [cite web|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtclimate/170/17019.htm|title=Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill First Report - FORMAL MINUTES|date=24 July 2007|accessdate=2007-11-29] on the final wording of their report. [cite web|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtclimate/170/17002.htm|title=Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill - First Report|date=24 July 2007|accessdate=2007-11-29]

Among the critics giving evidence was Lord Lawson who argued that the entire concept was counter-productive because humans would easily be able to adapt to the worst predictions of a 4 degree rise in temperature by the end of the century because, with an average world economic growth of 2%, they would be "seven times as well off as we are today", therefore it was not reasonable to impose a sacrifice on the "much poorer present generation". [cite web|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200607/jtselect/jtclimate/170/7051604.htm|title=Examination of Witnesses (Questions 32-39)|date=16 May 2007|accessdate=2007-11-29]

The Government response to the report was printed in October 2007. [cite web|url=http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/Cm7225%2DClimateChange.pdf|title=Taking Forward the UK Climate Change Bill: The Government Response to Pre-Legislative Scrutiny and Public Consultation - Command Paper 7225|date=October 2007|accessdate=2007-11-29]

Lords Debates

The Bill was introduced to the House of Lords by the Government on 14 November 2007.cite web|url=http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/climatechangehl.html|title=Climate Change [HL] Bill - 2007-08|accessdate=2007-11-29] The first debate on the floor of the House was held on 27 November 2007 and lasted 6 hours. [cite web|url=http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2007-11-27a.1123.4|date=27 November 2007|title=Climate Change Bill [HL] - Second Reading Debate|accessdate=2007-11-29] This was followed by ten sittings in the Committee Stage. [cite web|url=http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2008-01-14&number=1&dmp=1030&house=lords|title=Climate Change Bill - Committee of Commission|publisher=Publicwhip|date=14 January 2008] and ten votes for various amendments. [cite web|url=http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/policy.php?id=1030|title=Policy votes - Climate Change Bill|publisher=Publicwhip]

One of the votes rejected a proposal by a majority of 148 to 51 to change the target for 2050 from 60% to 80% below baseline 1990 emissions. [cite web|url=http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2008-02-25&number=2&house=lords&dmp=1030|title=Climate Change Bill = Target for 2050 is 60%|date=25 February 2008]

The Third Reading is scheduled for 31 March, [cite web|url=http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/climatechangehl.html|title=Climate Change Bill [HL] 2007-08|publisher=Parliament] after which it will be scheduled for debate in the House of Commons.

Positions

Political parties

The opposition Conservative Party support the concept of a bill, and proposed their own variation ahead of the Government's. [cite web|url=http://www.canihavethebillplease.co.uk/bill.html|title=Can I have the Bill please?|publisher=Conservative Party|accessdate=2007-03-13] One of the key differences is that they are demanding annual carbon targets, [cite web|url=http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2353253.ece|title=Ministers to unveil climate change bill|publisher=Independent Online Edition|date=2007-03-13|accessdate=2007-03-13] and that the Committee on Climate Change should have an enhanced role, setting targets as well as advising governments. [cite web
url=http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=135501
title=Key elements missing from draft Climate Change Bill
publisher=Conservative Party
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-13]

The Liberal Democrats take a similar stance to the Conservatives, and are also of the opinion that setting targets every five years is an abdication of responsibility, because a government typically remains in power for only four years. [cite web|url=http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article2352798.ece|title=Chris Huhne: We must monitor carbon targets annually|publisher= Independent Online Edition|date=2007-03-13|accessdate=2007-03-13] They have also stated that the proposed 60% cut by 2050 may not be sufficient, and that "we may well need to aim more towards about 80%". [cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6444145.stm|title='Binding' carbon targets proposed|publisher=BBC|date=2007-03-13|accessdate=2007-03-13]

A stronger response was provided by the Green Party of England and Wales. They consider that legislation provides a 'massive opportunity', but that the draft Bill is 'dangerously unambitious'. Among their demands are annual targets and an overall emission cut of 90% by 2050. [cite web
url=http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2920
title=Climate Change Bill 'dangerously unambitious'
publisher=Green Party of England and Wales
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-14]

Among the nationalist political parties whose views are known, the concept of a Climate Change Bill is supported in principle by the Scottish National Party [cite web
url=http://www.snp.org/press-releases/2005/snp_press_release.2006-01-26.9246526041
title=SNP joins cross-party force on Climate Change
publisher=Scottish National Party
date=2006-01-26
accessdate=2007-03-14] and the Democratic Unionist Party. [cite web
url=http://www.dup.org.uk/pdf/DUPManifesto2007LR.pdf
title=DUP Manifesto 2007, page 57
publisher=Democratic Unionist Party
date=2007-02-21
accessdate=2007-03-14] Respect - The Unity Coalition are in favour of a 90% cut in carbon emissions by 2050, but have not expressed a view on a bill. [cite web
url=http://www.respectcoalition.org/index.php?sec=39
title=Respect Environment Policy – March 2005
publisher=Respect - The Unity Coalition
date=March 2005
accessdate=2007-03-14] Welshist Plaid Cymru have proposed 3% year-on-year carbon cuts for Wales in their latest policy statements. [cite web
url=http://www.plaidcymru.org/content.php?nID=14;ID=157
title=7 for ’07 – Saving Wales: the Energy Plan
publisher=Plaid Cymru
date=2007-03-05
accessdate=2007-03-14]

The United Kingdom Independence Party believe that the Bill is only necessary because of a failure to devise a viable plan for other sources of energy to replace fossil fuels. They consider that the Bill is 'deeply misguided', likely to cripple the economy and that it will destroy investment in alternative technologies. Instead they believe that the Government and Opposition 'need to be looking into proper alternatives like nuclear power', and that plans to invest in renewable alternative energies as wind power and solar power, as well as cutting carbon emissions by 60%, were 'unachievable and unnecessary'. [cite web
url=http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2910
title=Cut Carbon? Go Nuclear
publisher=United Kingdom Independence Party
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-14]

Environmental groups

Friends of the Earth's Big Ask Campaign was one of the major factors that forced the government to include the Climate Change Bill in their legislative programme. [cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6045680.stm|title=UK planning law on climate change|publisher=BBC|date=2006-10-12|accessdate=2007-03-13] The organisation is demanding that the Bill should include legally binding targets for a reduction of at least 3% a year, amounting a total cut of around 80% by 2050. They consider that a 60% cut in carbon emissions by 2050 is no longer a sufficient contribution from developed countries to the international action on climate change. [cite web|url=http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/draft_climate_bill_publish_13032007.html|title=Draft climate bill published|publisher= Friends of the Earth|date=2007-03-13|accessdate=2007-03-13]

The UK arm of WWF supports the Bill, but launched its Get on Board campaign for the 2050 carbon reduction target to be raised to at least 80%, including the UK share of emissions from international aviation & shipping. In addition, WWF-UK are calling for retention of the House of Lords' amendment that at least 70% of the UK's reduction should be achieved domestically (limiting to 30% the proportion of the reduction that can be achieved through purchasing 'carbon credits'). [cite web|url=http://getonboard.wwf.org.uk/aboutStrengthening.php|title= Climate Change Bill - What needs strengthening|publisher=WWF-UK|date=2008-06-04|accessdate=2008-06-04]

The other 50 or so environmental, international development and other organisations belonging to the Stop Climate Chaos coalition backed the Big Ask Campaign and share similar views. The coalition itself criticised the Government for failing to acknowledge the 'global warming danger threshold' of 2°C. Taking this into account, they believe that the 2020 target should be a minimum of 30%, with an 80% target for 2050. They also consider that the Bill should include annual 3% reduction targets, cover aviation and shipping within its scope, and ban the purchase of carbon credits from overseas, a practice which they believe exports the emissions problem elsewhere. [cite web
url=http://www.icount.org.uk/news/i_count_media/news_releases_i_count/198.asp
title=I Count Campaign know Government can do better
publisher=Stop Climate Chaos
date=2007-03-13?
accessdate=2007-03-15]

The Joint Public Issues Team of the Baptist, Methodist, and United Reformed churches called for an 80 % reduction in carbon emissions [by 2050] , for not ignoring the contribution of air and sea travel, and for reductions of the United Kingdom’s own emissions rather than relying on buying carbon credits from other countries. [ [http://jointpublicissues.org.uk/jpitenvironment.htm Joint Public Issues Team of the churches: briefing on the Climate Change Bill (December 2007)] ]

Trade unions and businesses

The Confederation of British Industry, which has created its own climate change task force, welcomed the proposed Bill, stating that it combined two vital elements, long-term clarity on policy direction and flexibility in its delivery. [cite web
url=http://www.cbi.org.uk/ndbs/press.nsf/0363c1f07c6ca12a8025671c00381cc7/c89c2266d47c69128025729d003952ef?OpenDocument
title=Climate Change Bill strikes right balance
publisher=Confederation of British Industry
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-14]

Support for the Bill was also given by the Trades Union Congress. [cite web
url=http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-13068-f0.cfm
title=TUC comment on climate change bill
publisher=Trades Union Congress
date=2007-03-13
accessdate=2007-03-14]

Committee on Climate Change

The Committee on Climate Change, whose powers would be invested by Part 2 of the Bill, was launched in March 2008 with the appointment of Lord Adair Turner as its chair. [cite news|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3512041.ece|title=Climate czar, Lord Adair Turner, says take off your tie to cut CO2|date=8 March 2008|publisher=The Sunday Times|author=Jonathan Leake]

See also

*Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006

Organizations

*Campaign against Climate Change (UK pressure group)
*Energy policy of the United Kingdom and
*Energy use and conservation in the United Kingdom
*Rising Tide UK (UK climate change activist network)
*Stop Climate Chaos (UK pressure group)
*United Kingdom Climate Change Programme
*United Kingdom Energy Technologies Institute

General topics

*Global warming
*Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (California, USA)
*Kyoto Protocol
*International Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report
*List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions
*Nuclear phase-out
*Oil phase-out in Sweden
*Plug-in hybrid
*Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
*World energy resources and consumption
*2000 Watt society (Switzerland)

External links

* [http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7040/7040.asp Draft Climate Change Bill]
* [http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/climatechange-bill/ DEFRA Draft Climate Change Bill public consultation]
* [http://www.epolitix.com/EN/News/200703/103c2bd5-6b24-4077-b151-88fb1a7c8c6e.htm ePolitix.com Q&A: Climate Change Bill]
* [http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/climate/big_ask/ Big Ask Campaign]
* [http://getonboard.wwf.org.uk/index.php Get on Board, WWF-UK Climate Change Campaign]
* [http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/45372/story.htm Britain Publishes Climate Change Bill] .
* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY3F9TT2jDs Government launch video (YouTube)]
* [http://www.cesc.net/climateweb/shepherd/shepherdonclimate.pdf England's Climate & Energy Politics]

In the media

*10 April 2008, "Internet Public Library": [http://www.internet-public-library.org/carbon-reduction/painless-carbon-reduction.htm Painless Carbon Reduction by 80%]
*3 August 2007, "BBC": [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6928084.stm MPs & peers urge tougher carbon law]
*14 March 2007, "Independent Online": [http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2355960.ece A Bill which makes reducing carbon emissions a legal duty]
*23 February 2007, "Times Online": [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1426537.ece Miliband mocked by his critics as climate Bill is downgraded]
*15 November 2006, "Guardian Unlimited": [http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1948158,00.html Miliband denies cabinet split over climate bill]
*13 October 2006, "Politics.co.uk": [http://www.politics.co.uk/news/domestic-policy/constitution/state-opening-parliament-queens-speech/ministers-looking-carefully-at-climate-change-bill-$454548.htm Ministers 'looking carefully' at possible climate change bill]
*1 February 2006, "Euractive": [http://www.euractiv.com/en/sustainability/eu-climate-change-target-unfeasible/article-152154|title=UK chief scientific adviser: Keeping CO₂ concentration below 450ppm is 'unfeasible']

References