I stand corrected. John Duggan believed that the Government were not filling that void. I am glad to say that the Bill goes some way towards helping to address that balance, but there is a lot more that we need to do. We must not get carried away with the successes that we have today. The measure is very welcome, as is the direction of travel, but we have a lot further to go. It is also important that, in promoting and making the arguments for the Bill, we wrest back the arguments for carbon reduction in the face of climate change from the pessimists, and, in a spirit of hope and optimism, look for real changes that we can make that will benefit our economy. My hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath made exactly that point. If properly done, climate protection will reduce costs on business, not raise them. Using energy more efficiently offers a possible economic bonanza, not because of the benefits of stopping global warming, but because saving fossil fuel is a lot cheaper than buying it.
The world abounds with proven ways of using energy more productively. Over the past decade, for example, in contrast with the Government’s record on their estate, DuPont has boosted production by 30 per cent., but cut energy use by 7 per cent. and reduced greenhouse gases by a staggering 72 per cent. Companies such as British Telecom, IBM, Alcan, NorskeCanada and Bayer have collectively saved at least $2 billion since the late 1990s by reducing carbon emissions by more than 60 per cent. British BP has cut its CO2 emissions by 10 per cent. on its 1990 levels and saved $650 million in the process.
Although the Bill is not the whole answer, I must not negate the fact that there are many good measures in it. It focuses on national targets for microgeneration to be dealt with in two years. It allows for a review of permitted development with the purpose of making the installation of microgeneration easier. It makes access to renewable energy certificates for microgeneration easier, but we have a lot more to do on that if we are really to empower the consumer. The Bill gives a duty to promote community energy and renewable heat. It also gives the Government a duty to promote dynamic demand.
I particularly thank the Minister for agreeing to two new clauses for which I campaigned. The first gives all parish councils the power to set up new energy schemes, which has been mentioned during the debate. Localism is a key element of any successful promotion of microgeneration. The other new clause puts a duty on all local authorities to consider microgeneration and energy efficiency when discharging all their functions. I thank Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart—now Lord Bruce-Lockhart—for the important support that the Local Government Association gave to the new clause, which it achieved despite fierce opposition from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
Talking of the ODPM’s opposition, let me raise several of my disappointments. I tried to table a new clause that would have required all planning authorities—
Climate Change and SustainableEnergy Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Barker of Battle
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 12 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c661-2 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:56:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323919
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323919
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_323919