Chris Huhne - UK Secretary of State for Climate Change HARDtalk


Chris Huhne - UK Secretary of State for Climate Change

Similar Content

Browse content similar to Chris Huhne - UK Secretary of State for Climate Change. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

year's presidential elections. Here on BBC it is time for idle. And --

:00:07.:00:17.
:00:17.:00:19.

heart talk. -- HARDtalk. Nothing less than a global deal will be

:00:19.:00:25.

good enough to tackle global warming. That is the view of

:00:25.:00:29.

British Energy Secretary Chris Huhne. But when he leaves for the

:00:29.:00:32.

climate change conference in South Africa he will struggle to find

:00:32.:00:37.

other countries to agree with him. The idea of the world signing up to

:00:37.:00:43.

another treaty like Kyoto is losing support rather than Dani it. So

:00:43.:00:50.

what should happen next? How much does -- how does the world cut its

:00:50.:01:00.
:01:00.:01:06.

greenhouse gas emissions. -- gas emissions? Chris Huhne, will come

:01:06.:01:10.

too HARDtalk. You have said your ambition at Durban is a global deal

:01:10.:01:15.

because nothing less than that will be good enough. Do you really mean

:01:15.:01:21.

that? Yes. I do not mean we will finalise a global deal. That is not

:01:21.:01:29.

possible. But we need it are global legally binding agreement. Because

:01:29.:01:37.

no quibble -- serious global problem, whether or environmental

:01:37.:01:44.

or of a defence nature, has ever been left to voluntary pledges. It

:01:45.:01:51.

is not realistic. Anything that involves the serious long haul of

:01:51.:01:55.

major change in the way we power our economies with all be vested

:01:55.:02:02.

interest in fault requires a legally-binding global steel so we

:02:02.:02:06.

are all assured we are travelling at the same pace, each doing our

:02:06.:02:12.

bit in different ways, because the developing world has to be taken

:02:12.:02:17.

account of, the developed world can do more, but we must do it together.

:02:17.:02:21.

But the problem is that the only do we have had on climate change that

:02:21.:02:26.

is legally binding expires next year and instead of gaining friends

:02:26.:02:32.

it has lost them. Canada will not survive the last you stop river you

:02:32.:02:36.

are absolutely right that key a chair is the only game in town at

:02:36.:02:42.

the moment. Obviously we would like to see an extension. We would like

:02:42.:02:47.

to see everybody sign up to it. But that is unlikely because we have

:02:47.:02:53.

Russia, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Canada expressing

:02:53.:02:58.

scepticism about a second commitment period. As far as

:02:58.:03:04.

binding commitments come, it would be a European treaty covering at

:03:04.:03:12.

best about 15% of global emissions. And indeed Europe's own legal

:03:12.:03:17.

emissions limits are tighter than that. So it would not work. What

:03:17.:03:25.

can you get? We can get a clear commitment to a second period of

:03:25.:03:29.

care to, but it must be in the context of an overall commitment by

:03:29.:03:35.

all parties including some of the really big emitters for that have

:03:35.:03:41.

been coming up recently, for example China, to a global deal,

:03:41.:03:46.

not signed it to open but a commitment to get one by 2015 so we

:03:46.:03:51.

do what the science tells us is essential for us to do, which is to

:03:51.:03:59.

get global carbon emissions down by 2020. If we do not do that we will

:03:59.:04:02.

not hold global warming and will have really unpleasant climate

:04:02.:04:07.

change to deal with. So the ambition is to a for 2015. All

:04:07.:04:13.

those people who have not signed it trickier to go like America, you

:04:13.:04:19.

what been signed up in 2015? That would mean by the time ratification,

:04:19.:04:27.

and this is assuming you can get it, you are not talking about a deal in

:04:27.:04:33.

place until 2020? The deal must get carbon emissions down by 2020

:04:33.:04:39.

because that is what these sides is telling us. Ratified and in place,

:04:39.:04:47.

making sure we deliver on serious promises by Twenty20. That is the

:04:47.:04:52.

starting-point? Hopefully it will be earlier than that. But Beazer

:04:52.:04:56.

the absolute deadlines, the points at which we know if we have not

:04:56.:05:01.

delivered by then we will have major global problems in which

:05:01.:05:06.

vulnerable people in the developing world, B Small Island States, those

:05:06.:05:13.

who are River cultures, will have enormous problems. So we must deal

:05:13.:05:23.
:05:23.:05:24.

with this issue quickly. One of the aims is to try to limit global

:05:24.:05:30.

warming to two degrees above 1990 levels. If you go over to graze the

:05:30.:05:36.

site suggests you will get catastrophic results. This will be

:05:36.:05:41.

irreversible. You have the Chief Economist at the International

:05:41.:05:47.

Energy Agency saying he is worried. If we do not changed direction now

:05:47.:05:51.

the door will be close forever. He claims it must happen sooner than

:05:51.:05:58.

that. Obviously science is not totally precise on something as

:05:58.:06:03.

long-standing as climate change. But the advice that I have had

:06:03.:06:07.

clearly from outside to us is we must deliver in this period with

:06:07.:06:14.

carbon emissions globally coming down by 2020. It is a big ask but

:06:14.:06:19.

it does mean a lot of change for many people between now and then

:06:19.:06:24.

stop what the problem with fat, the reason it is a big ask, is that at

:06:24.:06:31.

the moment existing infrastructure, every extra building or power plant,

:06:31.:06:38.

accounts for 80% of carbon dioxide. So you only have that 20% left over

:06:38.:06:44.

to allow for reform. The International Energy Agency reckons

:06:44.:06:49.

that by 2015 it will account for 90% off carbon emissions. The room

:06:49.:06:55.

for manoeuvre is becoming more limited it and will close can baby

:06:55.:07:04.

by 27 chain. A lot of countries are doing what we're doing. We are

:07:04.:07:11.

moving towards a low carbon power sector. Within the UK we have in

:07:11.:07:15.

place a policy which will give legislative effect next year, which

:07:15.:07:20.

will encourage the replacement of much of the electricity generating

:07:20.:07:25.

assets that are coming off-line by low carbon generators. Increasingly

:07:25.:07:33.

we must do that. But you are right, if we don't, the more we put into

:07:33.:07:38.

all technologies which are bigger metres, the more we will waste a

:07:38.:07:44.

lot of capital. We have seen that in the past. It is not a good idea,

:07:44.:07:49.

but what we have had in the development of world economies is

:07:49.:07:54.

enormous investment in technologies which quickly look out of date. So

:07:54.:07:59.

you get vintages of technology which take time to change. But we

:07:59.:08:04.

must move quickly. We are still building vintage? We are in parts

:08:04.:08:14.
:08:14.:08:15.

of the world. When we build cold or -- call-powered power stations or

:08:15.:08:21.

gas-powered stations, we must build technologies that can scrub carbon

:08:21.:08:26.

consequences. If we have clean coal and gas through carbon catcher and

:08:26.:08:31.

storage we can get to the situation where we can use fossil fuel safely

:08:31.:08:36.

without emitting carbon but we are not there yet. What our way we

:08:36.:08:41.

playing with questioner what happens if we get to more than 2%?

:08:41.:08:46.

We are looking at a world which becomes enormously more dangerous

:08:46.:08:53.

for a large number of people. Especially in low-lying countries

:08:53.:08:59.

new VC, those who are relying for example on freshwater which is fed

:08:59.:09:05.

by glaziers, we are looking at potential for substantial rises in

:09:06.:09:12.

sea level. As the world warms up one thing that will happen is there

:09:12.:09:16.

will be greater capacity for war may air to hold moisture. As you

:09:16.:09:22.

hold more moister you get more precipitation, big storms, heavy

:09:22.:09:28.

rainfall. All of that has very substantial economic costs. He can

:09:28.:09:34.

destroy crops, destroy livelihoods, create Migration on a scale we have

:09:34.:09:40.

not seen before. All of these problems will be difficult.

:09:40.:09:45.

countries like the United States get that? Do they get the scale of

:09:45.:09:50.

the problem and the urgency? At the United States is an open society

:09:50.:09:56.

and has many people who do not get it under a lot you do get it. The

:09:56.:10:01.

American scientific community is one of the most advanced and the

:10:01.:10:07.

world in research on climate change. Along with our own Royal Society in

:10:07.:10:12.

the United Kingdom and all of the other leading scientific

:10:12.:10:16.

institutions, we see it as a major problem. But are their conclusions

:10:16.:10:21.

different? You say the scale of a problem means nothing less than a

:10:21.:10:27.

global deal? The Administration has recognised in the past that we must

:10:27.:10:32.

work towards a global deal. The key issue for Durban in terms of

:10:32.:10:36.

whether we are committed to a global deal as a community, is

:10:36.:10:41.

whether or not there is a real sign of movement from the leading

:10:41.:10:47.

developing countries. The United States will sign up if China signed

:10:48.:10:54.

such? If China signed some, a lot of the problems has been a deadlock

:10:54.:10:59.

between the United States and China, and if China news and there are

:10:59.:11:05.

reasons why China may move, I do not say it is going to happen with

:11:05.:11:11.

Chinese leadership change coming up, but if China does move it will be

:11:11.:11:15.

very hard for a Bubba administration to not also make a

:11:15.:11:21.

commitment to that overarching deal by 2015. Then we will know what we

:11:22.:11:26.

are aiming at. That will be an important step forward because we

:11:26.:11:32.

will aim at a single, over arching deal. But you have countries like

:11:32.:11:36.

China catching up. Countries that are not worried about the next

:11:36.:11:40.

generation but are worried about next year or next week because

:11:40.:11:45.

their economy is such that people are worried about jobs and basic

:11:45.:11:51.

survival now rather than the future. Of course. That is why there is no

:11:51.:11:55.

contradiction between what we need to power away out of this deep

:11:56.:12:01.

recession in the developed world and this whole agenda of replacing

:12:01.:12:06.

much of owl of infrastructure and replacing much of our high carbon

:12:06.:12:12.

electricity generation. For example in the UK we will be spending

:12:12.:12:16.

double what we normally spend in a business cycle on replacing

:12:16.:12:22.

electricity generation plant with new low-carbon plant. That will

:12:22.:12:27.

help the recovery, bring green growth and create jobs. You have a

:12:27.:12:34.

problem. You see no conflict. This government of which you are part of

:12:34.:12:38.

the Coalition came in with the Prime Minister saying it would be

:12:38.:12:44.

the greenest government ever. And yet be have the Chancellor, George

:12:44.:12:48.

Osborne, saying in his Autumn Statement to kick-start the economy,

:12:49.:12:52.

if we burden businesses with endless environmental goals however

:12:52.:12:57.

worthy then not only will they not achieve those goals but businesses

:12:57.:13:02.

will file, jobs will be lost and the country will be poorer. He said

:13:02.:13:07.

earlier this year we have to resolve that we are going to cut

:13:07.:13:13.

out carbon commissions -- emissions no slot, but no faster than our

:13:13.:13:18.

fellow country's. When we adopted the 4th carbon budget, the most

:13:18.:13:22.

ambitious goal that any leading developed country has adopted so

:13:22.:13:28.

far, we said it that for that part of our economy that is

:13:28.:13:32.

internationally competitive, the tradable sector, it must move in

:13:33.:13:37.

line with what happens with our trading partners in the European

:13:37.:13:42.

Union. What we are doing with the whole economy is try to move across

:13:42.:13:50.

to a world where we catch of the EU real uses, the real cost of carbon

:13:50.:13:54.

emissions in the point of electricity generation. But that

:13:54.:14:00.

carbon budget was a compromise, and there was a rout in Cabinet, you

:14:00.:14:04.

got it through but only because you excepted this idea that they would

:14:04.:14:09.

be a review, which is why the committee said there was an

:14:09.:14:16.

inconsistency in the Government's position. There is the possibility

:14:16.:14:26.
:14:26.:14:28.

of overturning that can be done in just free use. -- just three years.

:14:28.:14:33.

I do not accept that. All through history you have had government

:14:33.:14:36.

that tried to set up the object but realise they can only go so far

:14:36.:14:46.
:14:46.:14:50.

without the rest of the world going Back in the bad old days of

:14:50.:14:53.

communism you argued that you could not have communism almost everyone

:14:53.:15:03.

was communism. You cut solar subsidies, you shelved projects,

:15:03.:15:09.

scrapped the Sustainable Development Commission. Most of

:15:09.:15:12.

those things that you have suggested have not actually

:15:12.:15:18.

happened. The last of fighting against them. Carbon catch and

:15:18.:15:25.

storage, we have a strong commitment. The one project we have

:15:25.:15:35.
:15:35.:15:36.

to go ahead with was an organic. We had a insufficient budget. Everyone

:15:36.:15:41.

came away knowing that we could build a car then catch a storage

:15:41.:15:47.

plant for under budget. What about solar subsidies? All we have done

:15:47.:15:51.

is reduced the solar subsidies in line with the very dramatic fall in

:15:51.:16:00.

the cost of solar panels. We're paying exactly the same.

:16:00.:16:07.

explained that you have a policy that would include a feed in power.

:16:07.:16:15.

We still have that. The feed and Parrott has -- is still there.

:16:15.:16:20.

announced it would be halved. is because the cost of the panels

:16:20.:16:25.

have half. If you go on paying the same subsidy and the cost of what

:16:25.:16:29.

you are subsidising has gone down you massively -- up you massively

:16:29.:16:34.

increased the rate of return to people doing it. But you are

:16:34.:16:39.

determined to pursue that despite the consultation is not going for

:16:39.:16:44.

ten days beyond that. That is not true. We're committed not to change

:16:45.:16:49.

it before April. That is the exact situation. Wind for the proposals

:16:49.:16:54.

up there. All we have done is move the carrots in line with the

:16:54.:17:04.
:17:04.:17:05.

falling cost of solar panels. -- Harrods. Many others will also cut

:17:05.:17:10.

the subsidies because there is no point. You do not pay more than you

:17:10.:17:20.
:17:20.:17:25.

need to. You do not want to pay more than you have to. Those in the

:17:25.:17:28.

industry say that the government has put a lot of effort into

:17:28.:17:35.

building up the industry and has suddenly pull the redoubt. They

:17:35.:17:44.

make the point that you were talking about solar power lock --

:17:44.:17:48.

panels will be causing the loss of jobs. We'll be seeing the result of

:17:48.:17:58.
:17:58.:17:59.

that. We did so for a large-scale project about six months ago. The

:17:59.:18:05.

industry said that that this was pulling the rug out of the industry.

:18:05.:18:12.

But they have been growing ever since. All people involved in the

:18:12.:18:19.

business might to be able to give extra subsidies if they can. It is

:18:19.:18:25.

my job to make sure that we do not pay more than we need to. We want

:18:25.:18:32.

it transition towards a low carbon economy. It feeds into this idea of

:18:32.:18:42.
:18:42.:18:43.

you being untrustworthy of green ideas. Inconsistent. We had a

:18:43.:18:47.

review by a man who looked at disclaimer about the government

:18:47.:18:52.

been the greenest Aaron -- ever that said it was vanishing. He

:18:52.:18:58.

looked at 75 policies and a sauna progress. If you look at the

:18:58.:19:08.
:19:08.:19:09.

history of climate change we have had dramatic progress. We have got

:19:09.:19:16.

a new energy act which is pioneering absolutely new systems

:19:16.:19:20.

that make sure we get fundamental energy saving in a household. Look

:19:20.:19:29.

at what we have done with a renewal falls. We want to get greater

:19:29.:19:39.
:19:39.:19:40.

certainty. Are you disappointed? You have had to sit alongside a

:19:40.:19:49.

Chancellor who is saying what Greenpeace called a polluter's

:19:49.:19:57.

charter. I do not agree with that. If you want to make the transition

:19:57.:20:06.

there is no point for an industry like aluminium were 42% of the cost

:20:06.:20:09.

is electricity, forcing it to relocate from the UK to somewhere

:20:09.:20:15.

else where it would be polluting in another ban it. There is a balance

:20:15.:20:22.

to be struck. Looking at the Chancellor, this is the Chancellor

:20:22.:20:29.

who introduced the current price for. Using the European Union's

:20:29.:20:35.

emissions trading system is not giving a strong enough signal.

:20:35.:20:44.

We're going to have a national carbon price. He said in his

:20:44.:20:47.

speech... When you talked about curmudgeons, you are not talking

:20:47.:20:54.

about him. I was not. I was talking in that the criticism we were

:20:54.:20:59.

getting from some of the right-wing press. They believe we're in a

:20:59.:21:07.

world where we can rely on low fossil fuel prices. This is loading

:21:07.:21:15.

costs on to people. What we do know is that British households will end

:21:15.:21:22.

up saving money on their energy bill as the raw results about

:21:22.:21:32.
:21:32.:21:33.

policies. What they can take responsibility for is what the

:21:33.:21:38.

Government does to try and move this away from the vulnerability to

:21:38.:21:47.

does bigger fossil fuel price increase. That is what we're doing.

:21:48.:21:52.

When you look back at the last 18 months, here you are, Liberal

:21:52.:22:02.

Democrat in a coalition government. I am sure it is uneasy at times.

:22:02.:22:12.
:22:12.:22:13.

You yourself since he took on the job that you have, you have a very

:22:13.:22:20.

big public separation from your wife. You also want to know if she

:22:20.:22:30.
:22:30.:22:30.

is going to bring a prosecution against you. Given all that and the

:22:30.:22:35.

job that you do whether there aren't times we have just bought

:22:35.:22:40.

maybe I should just packet. If you cannot stand the heat, get out of

:22:40.:22:47.

the kitchen. I take enormous privilege to be able to do

:22:47.:22:52.

something about the environment. And passionate about making sure

:22:52.:23:02.
:23:02.:23:03.

that we push this agenda seriously. We have to show that we are going

:23:03.:23:07.

to be the greenest government ever. There will always be people out

:23:07.:23:12.

there who will be greener than Dow and say that we can go even further

:23:12.:23:20.

and faster, fear reality is that we have real achievements. That is an

:23:20.:23:30.

enormous privilege. There is another challenge which is your

:23:30.:23:37.

party. It has suffered as a result of being a Green government. I

:23:37.:23:43.

wonder if you have ambitions to lead the party. It may be a shadow

:23:43.:23:49.

of what it once was. My ambition is to make sure we do what we promised

:23:49.:23:59.
:23:59.:24:01.

we would do. To be the greenest government ever. I'm absolutely

:24:01.:24:06.

confident that when it comes to the next generation we will put the

:24:06.:24:13.

track record in making tough decisions, actually able to make

:24:13.:24:23.
:24:23.:24:25.

sure that those decisions are fair. I think people turn around to that

:24:25.:24:32.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS