Climate Change (G8 Summit)

Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 6:59 pm on 29th June 2005.

Alert me about debates like this

Question accordingly negatived.

Question, That the proposed words be there added, put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 31 (Questions on amendments), and agreed to.

Mr. Deputy Speaker forthwith declared the main Question, as amended, to be agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House welcomes the UK's global leadership on climate change and in particular the Prime Minister's decision to make climate change one of the top two priorities for the G8 Presidency and a priority for the EU Presidency; recognises that UK initiatives in 2005 have already made important contributions to the international debate on future climate change policy, in particular the scientific conference on stabilisation in February 2005 and the Energy and Environment Ministerial Roundtable in March 2005; looks forward to the Gleneagles Summit and provides its full support to the Prime Minister's continuing efforts to secure a successful outcome; commends the UK's plans to continue to strive for further international action following Gleneagles through both the G8 and EU; further commends the Labour Party for being the only party to commit in its manifesto to a national goal to reduce emissions by 20 per cent. by 2010; celebrates the UK's achievement in already reducing emissions to 13.4 per cent. between the base year and 2003, beyond that required by the Kyoto Protocol; further welcomes the introduction of policies such as the climate change levy and renewables obligation that have been so important in achieving this; and looks forward to the publication of the climate change programme later this year which will set out further policies to deliver the goal of a 20 per cent. reduction in emissions by 2010.

Annotations

I J
Posted on 20 Aug 2005 12:25 pm (Report this annotation)

Kyoto was only a start. Progress at the G8 in Scotland was recorded in the 'Gleneagles Plan of Action'(http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page7882.asp).

"23. Those of us who have ratified the Kyoto Protocol will (a) work to strengthen and develop the implementation of the market mechanisms . . ."
"33. We look forward to further discussions on how development and energy strategies can be strengthened to build resilience to climate impacts, including at the Millennium Review Summit in September 2005."

Moreover, three weeks later we had the Asia-Pacific Energy Initiative (http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Archive/2005/Jul/28-775591.ht...).

"The United States has joined five nations in the Asia-Pacific region in an initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote the sharing of energy technology. . .This new partnership includes the United States, Australia, China, India, Japan and South Korea. [The US Deputy Secretary of State] said the six countries combined represent more than half of the world's economy, population and energy use, and also produce half of the world's greenhouse gas emissions."

Bruce Savage
Posted on 22 Aug 2005 8:30 pm (Report this annotation)

Good morning

With regards to the Greenhouse effects I do believe that more investigations are needed. Preferably by organisations other than the scientific community whose integrity is very much in question at the moment. They (the scientists) have made too many mistakes and ubiquities the classic is the CFC debacle of a few years ago. The scientists use overstated scare tactics to try and get the population to believe their theories. The questions are – is the greenhouse effect real, will there be another ice age and of course when will it happen. We all know there will be another ice age it the when that is the real question.

My major concern at the moment is that our national airline British Airways (BA) has publicly stated that they do not need to employ British pilots but can and would employ foreign national instead. This company receives a subsidy of over £2million and wants to force the very support structure of the airline business the General Aviation (GA) sector to pay the dues owed by BA. The question is how can a National high profile organisation (it’s a private company by the way) be allowed to employ foreign national and still get a subsidy.

Lastly in view of what Labour Party is trying to put together regarding the terrorists and the terrorist bill. They should contact Ian Smith of Rhodesia (if he is still alive) and P Botha of the South African National Party to find out why all their regulations (which is surprisingly similar to our new bill) concerning terrorism failed. It seems the Labour party wishes to introduce the same policies which ultimately will have the same results, and the same heartaches for the population as did those (including black people) in Rhodesia and South Africa. The only answer is political, there is a dire need to address the issues of the terrorist parties and then compel them to abide by their own agreements. At the end of the day anything else will simply fail and bloodshed will be the result. We have already seen the effects terrorist are having, the police shooting of an innocent foreign national is one of them. The government is already losing the battle and ultimately the war.

Warm regards

I J
Posted on 23 Aug 2005 12:44 pm (Report this annotation)

How to keep the lights on in the UK is attracting much attention these days. Like most other countries, the UK is becoming an energy importer. In the order of priorities, greenhouse gases and climate change are taking a back seat.

In last month's 'Gleneagles Plan of Action', the G8 members who had signed Kyoto pledged "to strengthen and develop the implementation of the market mechanisms". It is hoped that market mechanisms will supply our energy needs for a bit longer. However the market is regularly thwarted; for example, almost 80% of the world's oil reserves are controlled by governments that have little regard for the free market. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2005-07-18.11580.h&a...

Moreover, there is little appetite to ask the United Nations to sort this out. Perhaps nations don't want a peaceful settlement of the energy crisis?

I J
Posted on 17 Sep 2005 11:04 am (Report this annotation)

The British Prime Minister has changed his thinking on Kyoto, it was reported yesterday. Tony Blair said: "No country is going to cut its growth."

"What countries will do is work together to develop the science and technology….There is no way that we are going to tackle this problem unless we develop the science and technology to do it." And "How do we move forward, post-Kyoto [agreement ends 2012]? It can only be done by the major players coming together and pooling their resources, to find their way to come together." http://www.techcentralstation.com/091505JP.html

The UK economy will of course benefit as more fetters are removed. As will the EU - the UK is currently president of the European Union.