Climate Change
(G8 Summit)
29th June 2005
John
Barrett (Edinburgh, West) (LD): I want to join the consensus
that was building—with one notable exception—in
the Chamber. The exception in question has clearly spent
many hours surfing Liberal Democrat websites, and long may
he continue to do so.
The G8 summit in Gleneagles
will focus on two themes: climate change and Africa. This
time, the public are more involved
than ever before, partly because of the celebrities involved,
but also because of what happened 20 years ago, when we saw—for
many people, it was the first time—the drought in Ethiopia
on our television screens. When Michael Buerk brought those
images into our homes, we saw the harsh reality of life on
the edge: men, women and children suffering from malnutrition,
with those who managed to survive the journey trekking miles
to camps for a meagre food supply. These events triggered
Live Aid, which connected many people, through television
and music, to this vitally important issue. Twenty years
on, we have to ask, what has changed?
To coincide with the G8
we have the Live8 concert in Edinburgh, which is taking place
at the Murrayfield stadium in my constituency.
The Make Poverty History march will also take place in Edinburgh,
on 2 July. We are expecting in excess of 100,000 people to
march through the city centre, and to make a "white
band" of people to send a message to the leaders at
Gleneagles. I invite others to join that march.
When we saw those images
in Ethiopia 20 years ago, a drought was expected once every
10 years; now, a drought is expected
approximately once every three years. Fewer Ethiopians
are dying from malnutrition, but more are on permanent
food aid.
We now see humanitarian disasters unfolding elsewhere
in Africa. Many factors are contributing to the disaster
in
Darfur, in Sudan: tribal conflict, Government corruption,
too many guns in the country and no clean water supply.
But one vital factor that is directly linked to the
troubles is the increasing size of the deserts, and the battle
for
scarce resources such as water and fertile land. We in
this
country think that we are witnessing extreme changes
in our weather, but those who will suffer most are the most
vulnerable,
who live in the world's poorest countries. Many young
children
in such countries will never see adulthood. At the other, extreme end
of the scale, approximately 100 million people in the United
States are overweight. Interestingly,
Paul Higgins, an earth systems scientist from the university
of California, reckoned that if the food energy used
to feed excessively those 100 million Americans were turned
into
an exercise regime, and if the basic resources spent
on
producing that food were spent differently, that in itself
would impact
on the climate.
I have tried to make some
small contribution myself. My hon. Friend the Member for
Lewes (Norman Baker) will
be pleased
to hear that I gave up my four-wheel drive car and
went instead for a fuel-efficient model. We cannot just pass
the buck
and blame this problem on the Government; we all have
to accept responsibility for the results of our actions.
However,
the Government are in a unique position because of
their
presidency of the G8.
Global warming is not an
abstract or distant threat. It is real and current, and must
be dealt with as a matter of urgency.
The G8 nations at Gleneagles account for 47 per cent. of
global CO2 emissions, so it goes without saying that the
G8 nations themselves, acting globally, can make a real
difference. Tougher international action is crucial to combat
climate
change and it is time to wake up to the threat before it
is too late.
Climate variation is now
an accepted part of the natural cycle of our planet. We know
that, historically, temperatures
have been both higher and lower than they are now. However,
what makes the current pattern of climate change so worrying
is the pace of change. Projections predict an increase
in the average surface temperature of between 1.5o and 6o
over
the period from 1990 to 2100. That is between two and 10
times larger than the value of observed warming over the
20th century and it is without precedent during the last
10,000 years. Global warming will affect us at home and
abroad and it will have social and environmental impacts.
Indeed,
it will impact on almost every aspect of our lives. It
is not surprising that our own chief scientific adviser said
that the threat from climate change was greater than that
from global terror.
The Kyoto agreement was
a good and positive first step towards tackling the issue,
but even if the US signed up to it tomorrow,
it would not solve many of the problems. We have to remember
that the agreement is very much a first step—and a
modest one at that. For example, it does not include many
developing countries and the largest polluter of all has
not signed up to it. Furthermore, many scientists believe
that even if the countries producing CO 2emissions signed
up and kept to the limits, it would still not be enough to
tackle the problem. The agreement aims to reduce emissions
from industrialised countries only by about 5 per cent.,
whereas the consensus of many climate scientists is that
in order to avoid the worst consequences of global warming,
emissions may have to be cut up to the order of 60 per cent.
across the board. That is why we should not put all our eggs
in the Kyoto basket.
With that in mind, it is
disappointing that so many countries have still failed to
meet even those most modest targets.
Indeed, it seems increasingly likely that the UK will miss
its own Kyoto targets. It does not give the Prime Minister
the strongest platform from which to argue for greater
efforts from others to combat climate change when we seem
unable
to put our own house in order. I very much hope, though,
that our own failings will not have an adverse effect on
the Prime Minister's chances of brokering an agreement
on climate change at the summit.
I am sure that Members from across the House will have
shared my disappointment and concern at the news that documents
on climate change for the G8 have been watered down. It
seems
that the US is still failing to
concede that climate change exists as a problem at all.
I find it extraordinary that doubt is being cast on the
notion
that the world is getting hotter.
My hon. Friend the Member
for Lewes has branded George W. Bush the environment's "public enemy No. 1", and
I am inclined to agree with him. It is unacceptable that
the US—the world's largest polluter, responsible for
more than a third of the world's pollution—refuses
to take its responsibilities seriously. It is unacceptable
that the US President, George W. Bush, simply ignores the
advice of his own scientists and continues to refuse to take
action to deal with pollution or to accept his responsibility
under the Kyoto treaty. There is a serious risk that the
US President will prevent the summit from agreeing to realistic
and timely actions on climate change and that the rest of
the G8 will let him get away with it. While the Prime Minister
likes to believe that he can sway the President's judgment
on these matters, I believe that, when it comes to climate
change, he may have little or no influence at all.
A leaked draft document
on climate change for the G8 summit spells out as good as
any other the danger of inaction. It
says:
"
If we miss this opportunity and fail to give a clear sense
of direction, then we will be locked into an unsustainable
future that will threaten our long-term security and prosperity."
I could not agree more.
The G8 summit must reach a positive agreement on climate
change. It is too important an issue
to be lost among international squabbles and petty transatlantic
rivalries. I urge the Prime Minister not to let that happen.
We must move towards consensus in the House. If the parties
in this Parliament cannot agree, how can we expect the
leaders at Gleneagles to agree?
See full debate in Hansard
|
