Thanks to the very many of you who completed my climate change survey, or who wrote, sent a card or e-mail in, in support of the Climate Change Bill, and/or proposing a further tightening of measures to tackle global warming. It is enormously encouraging to know so many people in this area feel strongly about the issue, although there remains a large number who have to be convinced that the changes that will need to be accommodated are justified.

We need to work to convince them, not only by explaining the risks inherent in temperature increases in line with recent levels of growth - described by Gordon Brown in last week’s speech as ‘comparable to the economic effects of a Great Depression combined with world war’ - but also by demonstrating how effective action is possible and rational.

As you may know, the Climate Change Bill is to be introduced in the House of Lords in the near future, before moving to the House of Commons in early 2008. It will be the first time any country has introduced legally-binding targets for cuts in emissions, and represents a major step forward in the political process for tackling global warming. However, important though it is, it is only part of a process which must embrace a wider range of local initiatives, and a new global agenda that takes us beyond Kyoto, and includes a strategy for elements such as aviation, which are currently excluded.

These were the key points you raised:

1 .Lifting the target for a percentage cut in carbon emissions from 60% to 80% by 2050.

The independent Stern Review (of the Economics of Climate Change) called for ‘absolute cuts in emissions’ compared with today, of 60%-80%. Cuts at this level are aimed at ensuring that the greenhouse gases stabilise at 450-550 particles per million (ppm). Gordon Brown has now announced that the new independent Committee on Climate Change will be asked to examine whether to raise the target to 80%, as one of its first tasks, alongside its job of considering the five-year carbon budgets.

2. Increasing the share of energy supplied from renewable sources.

At present, 9% of total energy in Britain is from low carbon sources, 2% from renewables and 7.5% from nuclear. If we are to meet our global greenhouse gas targets by 2050, almost ALL energy will have to come from low carbon sources. The recent Energy White Paper announced plans to triple the amount of electricity from renewables by 2015, but we need to do more. At the European Council this spring, Britain led the way to an agreement that by 2020 20% of all Europe’s energy should come from renewables, and Britain is committed to meeting our share.

Specifically, this will include more onshore wind farms; greater use of energy from waste; a major expansion of energy from biomass and greater use of microgeneration. We are also studying the potential of generating tidal energy from the River Severn- a project which by itself could provide 5% of Britain’s energy needs.

Opinion is divided on the importance of nuclear power, but the development time is so great that there can be no reliance on this helping to ensure that we meet our 2015 - and quite probably not our 2020 targets. There is no short to medium substitute for greater energy efficiency and low carbon energy production.

3. Including aviation and shipping emissions in the calculation

Though relatively small contributors to total carbon emissions, these sectors are growing very fast, and will contribute an increasing share of a reducing total.

There can be no doubt that international aviation and shipping emissions should be included in the UK’s carbon budget. Whether this can be done without international agreement on how to calculate national shares is less clear. At present, aviation is excluded from the Kyoto agreement and is governed by a complex set of international legal agreements in respect of fuel taxation and so forth. It is very important that we re-negotiate these agreements as soon as possible, but in the meantime, unilateral action is difficult and may be illegal or even counter-productive.

There is already an EU system in place for carbon trading, and the government has been working to bring aviation into the scheme. What this means is an overall cap on carbon for the sector, with an allocation for each industry, which can then sell any surplus or buy additional carbon credits, within the cap. This acts as an economic incentive to reduce carbon emissions, although this depends on how low the cap is set, and the price of carbon credits. Carbon Trading is not yet living up to its full potential, but it does have an important role, not least as we work with developing countries that will demand the right to grow their economies whilst we all work to cap global warming.

The Climate Change Bill helpfully seeks to set limits on the extent to which carbon budgets can be used for ‘borrowing and banking’ or for purchasing credits from outside the carbon trading arena. These limits are important if a good system in principle is not to be undermined in practice.

4. Frequency of benchmarks/annual targets

Campaigners have asked for annual carbon reduction targets rather than five year carbon budgets and annual reports to Parliament set out in the Bill. However, the all-party Select Committee considering the report reflected widespread concern that this could have perverse consequences, forcing the government and others into short-term measures just to hit targets whilst losing the focus on the more substantial policies that can only deliver over a longer timescale.

The government is resistant to going beyond an annual report, and I have some sympathy with the arguments against legally binding annual targets. However, I think some system of ‘benchmarking’ progress that is not itself legally binding may provide an important discipline.

It is also important to note that the Climate Change Bill puts into law our interim target of a 26% to 32% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2020 - which means cutting greenhouse gas emissions overall by between 32% and 37%.

5. Local leadership needed to boost recycling and energy efficiency

Westminster lags behind many other London boroughs when it comes to recycling. New figures released by the Government show just 20% of rubbish was recycled, which leaves the borough trailing behind neighbouring local authorities like Kensington, Camden, Hammersmith and Brent.

When I tried to amend the Greater London Authority Act this spring, to give the Mayor more strategic powers over recycling (NOT rubbish collection), Westminster strongly opposed this. But time is running out and the borough needs to raise its game dramatically. It is certainly true that it is harder to recycle when many properties are in blocks of flats, but Westminster is not alone in this and needs to find a way around it.

Westminster Council could also do better when it comes to average energy efficiency. A recent study put Westminster 14th out of 33 London councils. One in five properties in my constituency fail the ‘thermal comfort’ element of the Decent Homes Standard, which is bad news for householders who suffer from cold and extra expense, and bad news for the environment. Council and Housing Association Homes have been upgraded in recent years so that they meet the Decent Homes Standard, but much more needs to be done to tackle the problem in the private and private rented sectors. The even worse news is that Westminster Council hardly oversaw ANY improvements in energy efficiency in recent years - whilst many other London councils saw big improvements.

We need much stronger local leadership on this issue, and I would be grateful for your support as I press the Council on it.

Climate change requires us to rise above short term political interests, yet it is also a profoundly political issue. As the Stern report says, climate change represents the

“greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen.”

The legally-binding targets, five year carbon budgets and other measures add up to a domestic framework, to be complemented by EU wide, and global policies in the post-Kyoto agreement era, without which it will be impossible to tackle this ‘market failure’. But achieving those targets means specific actions - including taxation; tax-breaks and incentives to change individual and corporate behaviour; boosting recycling, improving energy efficiency; greater use of renewable energy sources; investment in new technologies and more.

It will be at this level of specificity that the argument will be won or lost, and government cannot do it alone.

Additional information

You may find the following of interest:

The Mayor of London’s Climate Change Strategy for London:

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/climate-change/london.jsp

Parliamentary Select Committee inquiry into the Draft Climate Change Bill:

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/environment__food_and_rural_affairs/efra_draft_climate_change_bill.cfm

Other all party Parliamentary Committees, such as the Environmental Audit Committee, can be found by going to www.parliament.uk and following the links to Select Committees.

I hope that this is helpful. I will try and keep you updated on the progress of the Bill, and am planning a meeting with a DEFRA minister on this issue on the New Year.

I very much welcome any additional comments you may have.

With best wishes

Yours sincerely,

Karen Buck MP