Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government further to the finding by the
Mauna Loa Observatory that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
reached 419 parts per million in May 2021, what advice they have
received from their Chief Scientific Adviser about the
implications of global warming for the United Kingdom.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy () (Con)
Her Majesty’s Government and advice from their Chief Scientific
Adviser are informed by the latest scientific evidence as
presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The
panel’s report set out how, as carbon dioxide concentrations in
the atmosphere rise, global temperatures are also expected to
rise, with severe impacts globally. Risks to the UK are assessed
in the UK’s climate change risk assessments, which are informed
by the Climate Change Committee’s independent assessments.
(LD)
I thank the Minister for his reply. The figure of 419 parts per
million is the highest ever recorded over the last 800,000 years
and it is a direct indicator, based on hard science, of a rapidly
changing climate and consequent irreversible damage to our
ecosystems. The BBC reports that in January 2020 some hard
science was presented to the Prime Minister in the form of a
slide show at a teach-in organised by Sir and led by Professor
Stephen Belcher of the Met Office. It is said to have convinced
the Prime Minister to take climate change seriously and that must
mean keeping fossil fuels in the ground. Was the Minister present
and will he ask for a similar teach-in for all government
departments?
(Con)
No, I was not present, but we have regular meetings with all the
advisers who inform government policy on this matter. I know the
noble Baroness has a strong view about “leaving fossil fuels in
the ground”, but we require gas as a transition fuel. In the
context of the recent crisis in Ukraine, surely even the noble
Baroness can see the logic of obtaining that transitional fuel
from UK sources.
(CB)
My Lords, in 2020 BEIS set up a committee to look at and
collaborate on policy development to ensure that individual
policies were joined up across government—surely a good move.
That committee was disbanded in May 2021. May I ask the Minister
two questions? What has replaced that committee as a
cross-government body to oversee climate considerations in all
departments? If that committee is the one chaired by the Prime
Minister, when did it last meet and are we allowed to know what
it discussed?
(Con)
There is a Cabinet committee on climate change chaired by the
Prime Minister dealing with cross-government issues. The noble
Baroness will be aware individual Cabinet committee meetings are
confidential, but she can be assured that there is regular
collaborative cross-government working between departments on all
these issues.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Thwaites Glacier in western Antarctica is
collapsing into the sea, which could raise sea levels by as much
as 10 feet if the whole ice sheet falls. In such circumstances,
have the Government undertaken an assessment of the likely impact
that this would have on coastal communities in the UK and on
vulnerable areas around the world?
(Con)
The Government’s third climate change risk assessment sets out 61
risks and opportunities facing the UK from climate change, with
eight priority risk areas identified as requiring action within
the next two years. Action already taken includes £5.2 billion in
2021 for flood and coastal defences.
(Ind Lab)
My Lords, following the IPCC report, mentioned by the noble
Baroness, Lady Sheehan, on the damage to our ecosystem, can the
Minister update the House on what further work is being done to
engage the public on climate change and biodiversity issues? I
think he agrees with me that evidence shows that, if these issues
are understood, far more people are willing to change the way
they live to reduce the impact of climate change.
(Con)
My Lords, I agree with the noble Baroness; of course, we
regularly undertake public information activities. The public are
well aware of the risks presented by climate change and there is
wide public support for action.
(Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that these concerns make it
even more imperative that we press ahead with our plans for
getting more nuclear power, and that anyone opposing that has no
idea of what the risks are?
(Con)
On this, as with so many issues, I totally agree with the noble
Lord; he should, perhaps, be on this side of the House. The noble
Lord is, of course, absolutely right. We need to expand our
nuclear power provisions and I am delighted that we have the
support of the Official Opposition for our Nuclear Energy
(Financing) Bill, which is shortly to come back to the House.
(LD)
My Lords, do the Government plan to take any action to ensure
that factually incorrect statements made in your Lordships’ House
are corrected, either at the time they are made or subsequently,
given that the science behind climate change is
incontrovertible?
(Con)
Individual Members are responsible for their own statements and
opinions. This is a debating House, in which there are strongly
held opinions on all sides, but if any Member, whether in
government or otherwise, gets something factually wrong, I am
sure they would want to correct the record.
of Ullock (Lab)
My Lords, this week’s IPCC report suggests increasingly severe
climate impacts, with warnings that heatwaves and flooding are
highly likely, including in the UK. Firefighters are the primary
public service responding to flooding in the UK; heatwaves can
cause wildfires, which firefighters increasingly face. Yet our
fire and rescue service has seen huge cuts, including one in
every five firefighters since 2010. What plans do the Government
have to fully support those in our emergency services who have to
deal with the increasing numbers of catastrophic events?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness makes an important point. Of course
we want to support workers in our emergency services, who do such
a tremendous job. We saw some of that during the recent flooding:
they are the first line of our defence, and we should support
them in every way that we can.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, the Minister mentioned the Nuclear Energy (Financing)
Bill. He will be aware from an intervention that I made
previously that many of us are concerned that the Scottish
Government might be able to use planning laws to thwart the
development of new nuclear in Scotland. Is it not the case that,
if this is vital for the security and diversity of energy supply
for the whole United Kingdom, there must be some way in which the
United Kingdom can make sure that new nuclear can extend to
Scotland as well? Will he look into this further?
(Con)
I would be happy to have a further look at it and I completely
agree with the noble Lord. I think the Scottish Government’s
policy to rule out new nuclear is crazy, and what will end up
happening is that Scotland will be supplied from nuclear power in
England and Wales, because there are lots of interlinking
connecters. The same thing is happening in Germany. Ironically,
the Germans just announced that they were abandoning their
nuclear stations, but will end being supplied by the huge number
just across the border in France.
