Schedule 6
Climate Change Bill [Lords]
4:00 pm
John Gummer (Suffolk Coastal, Conservative)
That temptation arises on many occasions. I am glad that the Minister has rightly fought against temptation, but I know exactly what he means—the same is true of other things in life.
We must therefore try to make the Bill the most sensible answer possible. It goes against a lifetime’s experience to say this, but I think that the Liberal Democrats were right to table amendment No. 1—they know that that is my general view. It is right to make the changes that they have proposed, first because this is a matter of life cycles. It is quite a difficult thing to do, but at the same time it is essential. One cannot say that particular biofuels from particular sources are always as beneficial in one circumstance as another.
Let me give an example: biofuels produced close to the point of use are likely to have a lower carbon footprint than those produced a very long way away that have to be carried a long distance, although not necessarily. A biofuel source may be much more carbon intensive if the fuel is produced using a particular process rather than another way. A lot of research has shown that to be true.
I commend to the Minister the work of Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, which he supports. That partnership has produced some good work on which we can base our judgments. I was sad that the Government found themselves unable to use its work from the beginning on the renewable transport fuel obligation. I hope that they can use it now and the amendment will enable it to be used.
Subsection (2)(b) of the amendment would widen the tone of the phrase by using the words “enhancement”, “protection”, “national or global environment” and “generally”. They are all useful additions that would help to achieve what the Government really want. I hope that the Government feel that they can take that on board.
Finally, the amendment is valuable because it would add to the administration of the system—a point that you, Mr. Atkinson, drew our attention to earlier on. That is important because we must move to a world in which we take these matters into account automatically and without a second thought, so that this is not some great new operation stuck out there, but simply the way that we think and the means by which we move forward. It is what my mother used to refer to as “good habits”. There is a lot to be said for doing things the right way all the time. I shall put it bluntly: people who find themselves in extremis revert to type, so it is valuable for them to have good habits. When something crops up that they did not expect, I want the default mode of a society and a Government to be, “This is how we behave and this is the mechanism that we always use”. Therefore, I congratulate the Liberal Democrats for tabling the amendment, because it not only makes the point that needs to be made, but sets an example about how we ought to behave in all circumstances.
We should ensure that the two elements are measured—first, the life cycle, so that we know what the carbon footprint really is; and secondly, how it contributes to sustainable development, not only to the protection of, but to the enhancement of both the national and the global environment. All that should be seen not just in specifics, but in generalities. Therefore, I hope that the Government will find this a suitable amendment to accept. I know that it is always difficult to accept amendments but, after all, this one is in line with their own thinking.