19/11/2015

:00:00. > :00:00.sound financial base for thd future. Statement, the Secretary of State

:00:00. > :00:09.for Northern Ireland, Theresa Villiers.

:00:10. > :00:15.I would like to make a statdment on the agreement reached this week on

:00:16. > :00:19.the cross-party talks in Stormont. First I would like to pay tribute to

:00:20. > :00:22.Peter Robinson he announced this morning he will very soon bd

:00:23. > :00:27.standing down as First Minister and leader of the Denmark -- le`der of

:00:28. > :00:32.the Democratic Unionist party. Peter has been a central figure in

:00:33. > :00:40.Northern Ireland politics for four decades. His long and distinguished

:00:41. > :00:43.record, he has championed Northern Ireland with unparalleled

:00:44. > :00:46.effectiveness and dedication. He was key to the agreement reached this

:00:47. > :00:50.week and he can be rightly proud of his contribution. I am sure the

:00:51. > :00:56.whole house will join me in wishing long and happy retirement. Last

:00:57. > :01:01.December the Stormont House Agreement was reached after 11 weeks

:01:02. > :01:04.of negotiations between the five largest Northern Ireland parties and

:01:05. > :01:08.the UK and Irish governments. The agreement addressed some of the most

:01:09. > :01:14.difficult challenges facing Northern Ireland, including the finances of

:01:15. > :01:17.the devolved executive, welfare flags and parades, the legacy of the

:01:18. > :01:22.past and reforms of the Assdmbly to make devolution work better. All of

:01:23. > :01:27.this was underpinned by a fhnancial package from the UK Governmdnt that

:01:28. > :01:31.would give the executive around 2 billion in extra spending power The

:01:32. > :01:35.Stormont House Agreement, in the view of the government, was and

:01:36. > :01:40.remains a good deal for Northern Ireland. By the summer, howdver it

:01:41. > :01:44.was clear that implementation had stalled. There were a very strong

:01:45. > :01:47.differences of opinion withhn the executive over the budget and

:01:48. > :01:52.implementation of welfare aspects the agreement and these werd

:01:53. > :01:57.preventing other elements of the agreement from going ahead. We were

:01:58. > :02:00.facing a deadlock which left unresolved would have made darly

:02:01. > :02:05.assembly elections more and more likely with an ever-increashng risk

:02:06. > :02:10.that the collapse of devolution would follow. After all that has

:02:11. > :02:12.been achieved in Northern Ireland a return to direct rule from

:02:13. > :02:19.Westminster would have been a severe set back and it is an outcole which

:02:20. > :02:24.I have been striving to avohd. In August, a second issue thre`ten the

:02:25. > :02:26.stability and survival of devolution. The suspected

:02:27. > :02:30.involvement of involvement of members of the provisional HRA in a

:02:31. > :02:36.murder in Belfast raised once again the spectre of paramilitary activity

:02:37. > :02:41.in Northern Ireland is and hts malign and totally unaccept`ble

:02:42. > :02:44.impact on society. Faced with the circumstances we concluded ht was

:02:45. > :02:50.necessary to convene a fresh round of cross-party talks with the five

:02:51. > :02:54.main parties in Northern Irdland and the Irish government on matters on

:02:55. > :03:00.which they have responsibilhty of serving the well-established three

:03:01. > :03:03.strand approach. Those talks began on the 8th of September and they

:03:04. > :03:09.have run for ten weeks. The objectives we set were twofold.

:03:10. > :03:12.Firstly secure the implementation of the Stormont House Agreement.

:03:13. > :03:19.Secondly, to deal with conthnued paramilitary activity. I believe

:03:20. > :03:22.that the document published on Tuesday entitled fresh start, the

:03:23. > :03:25.Stormont agreement and implementation plan, makes real

:03:26. > :03:30.progress towards fulfilling those of his hugely important object is.

:03:31. > :03:35.Crucially, it takes the two issues that have those the greatest threats

:03:36. > :03:39.to the stability and surviv`l of devolution in Northern Irel`nd.

:03:40. > :03:43.First, on the Stormont Housd Agreement. The new agreement will

:03:44. > :03:49.help give the executive are stable and sustainable budget, asshsted by

:03:50. > :03:55.further financial support of around 500 million from the UK Govdrnment.

:03:56. > :03:58.These funds are to help the executive tackle issues which are

:03:59. > :04:04.unique to Northern Ireland. They include substantial support for the

:04:05. > :04:09.executive's programme of reloving so-called peace walls. They also

:04:10. > :04:13.include 160 million to assist the Police Service of Northern Hreland

:04:14. > :04:18.in their crucial work to colbat the threat from dissident Republican

:04:19. > :04:22.groupings. The package also paves the way for completion of the

:04:23. > :04:28.devolution of corporation t`x powers to the Northern Ireland Executive,

:04:29. > :04:31.something which could have ` genuinely transformative effect on

:04:32. > :04:35.the Northern Ireland economx and jobs and prosperity. The me`sures in

:04:36. > :04:39.the Stormont House Agreement designed to address the isstes

:04:40. > :04:43.around flags and parades will now go ahead and there is agreement on

:04:44. > :04:47.reforms to the executive and the Assembly to make devolution work

:04:48. > :04:51.better, including on the size of the Assembly, the number of govdrnment

:04:52. > :04:58.departments, use of the Pethtions of Concern and provision for an

:04:59. > :05:02.official opposition. Secondly, on paramilitary activity, the `greement

:05:03. > :05:06.takes Northern Ireland's le`ders further than ever before on this

:05:07. > :05:10.issue. It strongly reaffirms the commitment to upholding the rule of

:05:11. > :05:14.law and makes it absolutely clear that in those circumstances will

:05:15. > :05:19.paramilitary activity ever be tolerated. The agreement pl`ces new

:05:20. > :05:25.shared obligations on executive ministers to work together towards

:05:26. > :05:29.ridding society of all paralilitary groups and activities and

:05:30. > :05:35.challenging paramilitaries hn all of its forms. The agreement colmits all

:05:36. > :05:40.participants to act concertdd and enhanced effort to combat organised

:05:41. > :05:45.and cross-border crime which the UK Government will help to fund. A key

:05:46. > :05:49.element of the Stormont House Agreement on which we were tnable to

:05:50. > :05:53.agree a way forward was the establishment of new bodies to deal

:05:54. > :05:58.with the legacy of the past. We did establish common ground between the

:05:59. > :06:04.parties on a range of significant questions on how to establish those

:06:05. > :06:09.new structures, but sadly not enough to enable legislation to go forward

:06:10. > :06:12.as yet. The government conthnues to support these provisions because of

:06:13. > :06:17.the pressing need to providd better outcomes for Vic Dems and

:06:18. > :06:21.survivors, the people who wd must never forget have suffered lore than

:06:22. > :06:26.anyone else as a result of the Troubles. So what is crucial that we

:06:27. > :06:30.all now reflect on what needs to be done to achieve the wider consensus

:06:31. > :06:37.needed to get those new leg`cy bodies set up. I want to emphasise

:06:38. > :06:42.that in large part the agredment published on Tuesday takes on board

:06:43. > :06:47.a wide range of points made out all five of the Northern Ireland parties

:06:48. > :06:51.during the ten weeks of talks just concluded as the overwhelming

:06:52. > :06:55.majority of issues were in the devolved area this agreement has

:06:56. > :06:58.rightly been driven by Northern Ireland's elected leaders, hn

:06:59. > :07:02.particular by the first and Deputy First Minister is, and I wotld like

:07:03. > :07:06.to reiterate my sincere thanks to them and to all of the five Northern

:07:07. > :07:12.Ireland parties who worked with determination and commitment in the

:07:13. > :07:15.top is. Thanks to my honour`ble friend the Northern Ireland minister

:07:16. > :07:20.and the ministers Charlie Flanagan and Sean Sherlock from the Hrish

:07:21. > :07:26.government, all of whom gavd many long hours to this project `nd made

:07:27. > :07:31.an invaluable contribution to a successful outcome. Implementation

:07:32. > :07:34.of this week's agreement is already underway. On Tuesday, the executive

:07:35. > :07:41.voted to support it. Yesterday, the Assembly passed an LCM on wdlfare

:07:42. > :07:43.legislation at Westminster `nd the Northern Ireland Welfare Reform Bill

:07:44. > :07:49.will be introduced to Parli`ment later today. I believe this package

:07:50. > :07:55.as a whole gives us the opportunity for a fresh start for devolttion. It

:07:56. > :07:59.is a further stage in delivdring the government's manifesto commhtment to

:08:00. > :08:03.implement the Stormont Housd Agreement and that is anothdr step

:08:04. > :08:06.forward towards a brighter, more secure future for everyone hn

:08:07. > :08:14.Northern Ireland and I commdnd the statement to the house. Can I first

:08:15. > :08:19.of all thank the Secretary of State for her statement and the usual

:08:20. > :08:23.courtesy in a line in the e`rly sight of it? Can I start by agreeing

:08:24. > :08:30.with the Secretary of State in paying tribute to Peter Robhnson who

:08:31. > :08:32.has announced he is to step down. His contribution to peace and

:08:33. > :08:38.progress in Northern Ireland has been immense. He has taken tough

:08:39. > :08:41.decisions in trying to reach out to all communities and Northern Ireland

:08:42. > :08:46.is a better place in no small part to the immense work that he has done

:08:47. > :08:52.and I joined the Secretary of State in wishing him well for the future.

:08:53. > :08:57.Can I begin also buy, lamenting all of those who have contributdd to

:08:58. > :09:00.this document, including thd UK and Irish governments, document which

:09:01. > :09:03.despite some obvious challenges and omissions once again offers Northern

:09:04. > :09:07.Ireland are way forward. Ond more stepping stone towards the brighter,

:09:08. > :09:13.better future that the people of Northern Ireland want and ddserve.

:09:14. > :09:17.Does she agree with me that it is the implementation of the agreement

:09:18. > :09:20.that is crucial and that thd people of Northern Ireland don't w`nt to be

:09:21. > :09:25.faced in a year or two with another crisis? This really has to be a

:09:26. > :09:29.fresh start. Issue confident that the measures contained withhn this

:09:30. > :09:33.agreement to offer a way forward in a number of various? In particular,

:09:34. > :09:37.we welcome the commitment to bring an end to paramilitaries.

:09:38. > :09:42.Paramilitary activity has to stop and that goes on for a new strategy

:09:43. > :09:47.to bring this about overseen by a panel is critical. Let me s`y to the

:09:48. > :09:50.Secretary of State, is she, like me and many people I meet in Northern

:09:51. > :09:56.Ireland, worried about thesd groups and their attraction to young

:09:57. > :09:59.people? Apparent easy money, lack of career opportunities and edtcational

:10:00. > :10:02.underachievement and the false belief that membership of stch

:10:03. > :10:08.groups can give you a status has to be tackled with many of thel growing

:10:09. > :10:11.up in relative peace? Will the Secretary of State use her position

:10:12. > :10:15.to ensure that countering the attraction of these groups to young

:10:16. > :10:20.people is one of strategic priority, as I believe it should

:10:21. > :10:24.be? In establishing the joint agency task force can the Secretarx of

:10:25. > :10:27.State say more about how cross-border co-operation whll work

:10:28. > :10:31.and what resources they will be for the PSNI and whether she expects the

:10:32. > :10:37.number of prosecutions will increase? Can I welcome the

:10:38. > :10:41.confirmation of the work thd Secretary of State has outlhned to

:10:42. > :10:46.be undertaken with respect to flags and parades and does she agree this

:10:47. > :10:49.is both urgent and crucial? Does the Secretary of State share my

:10:50. > :10:53.disappointment that no agredment was made with respect to legacy issues

:10:54. > :10:57.in the past was possible and can to say more about what the isstes where

:10:58. > :11:01.and how she believes they c`n be resolved? For example, high with the

:11:02. > :11:04.clash between national security considerations and disclosure be

:11:05. > :11:09.resolved? Clearly victims and survivors have to be a key part of

:11:10. > :11:13.any process and they understand that dealing with the past is incredibly

:11:14. > :11:20.difficult with competing narratives and contested versions of events but

:11:21. > :11:24.a comprehensive approaches critical. Does the Secretarx of

:11:25. > :11:28.State agree with me that thd search for truth and justice often seem to

:11:29. > :11:33.be unattainable possibilitids and yet isn't it the case that the

:11:34. > :11:36.people of Northern Ireland `nd their politicians have made the apparent

:11:37. > :11:42.and possible compromises and build consensus where none seemed likely?

:11:43. > :11:45.Will the Secretary of State ensure that further efforts are made to

:11:46. > :11:50.deal with the past? What pl`ns has yet to meet with Vic comes groups

:11:51. > :11:54.and discuss the way forward? Given that there is no agreement hs

:11:55. > :11:58.funding to be made availabld to the PSNI to continue with their legacy

:11:59. > :12:06.work as Chamakh the house h`s also been asked to legislate on Welsh

:12:07. > :12:11.reform -- Welfare Reform. It is a programme for jobs and growth which

:12:12. > :12:14.is also needed. What measurds are there in the agreement over and

:12:15. > :12:21.above the devolution of Corporation Tax which will do this whild also

:12:22. > :12:26.improving the infrastructurd? To conclude, I see this as a stepping

:12:27. > :12:30.stone towards that shared ftture. Of course there are frustrations and

:12:31. > :12:40.disagreements and disappointment at the failure to come to a higher ..

:12:41. > :12:42.The alternative could have been a situation with the devolution

:12:43. > :12:50.settlement could have been `t risk, leading to direct rule. Whatever

:12:51. > :12:53.people see as its disappointments there is another breathing space,

:12:54. > :12:59.another opportunity for Northern Ireland to move forward, colbat

:13:00. > :13:02.paramilitaries, combat sect`rianism and have a stable government

:13:03. > :13:14.financially and politically. That opportunity much be grasped -- must

:13:15. > :13:18.be grasped. Experience cert`inly tells me to agree with you that

:13:19. > :13:22.implementation is key. Reaching an agreement is just the start of a

:13:23. > :13:26.broader process. I warmly thank him for his support for this agreement

:13:27. > :13:32.and for the Stormont House Agreement. I very much agred with

:13:33. > :13:35.him that a key part of a strategy to see the end of paramilitarids in

:13:36. > :13:39.Northern Ireland busting food programmes for young people to

:13:40. > :13:46.ensure that they are not dr`wn into this kind of act 70 four st`rt that

:13:47. > :13:50.the something on which we h`d the -- constructive discussions during the

:13:51. > :13:53.talks. I'm sure that will bd part of the strategy foreseen by thd

:13:54. > :13:57.agreement. In terms of the task force and the surge in crimhnal

:13:58. > :14:03.activity and the cross-borddr work, it will be based on struck jurors

:14:04. > :14:09.which already exist. It will have renewed vigour and activity,

:14:10. > :14:13.including the 25 million additional funding to support action against

:14:14. > :14:17.paramilitaries. We are determined as the UK Government to do all that we

:14:18. > :14:21.can to work with the devolvdd bodies, the Minister of justice and

:14:22. > :14:26.the Irish government and thd relevant agencies there, thd PSNI

:14:27. > :14:32.anti-Irish police working together is crucial. If you tremendotsly

:14:33. > :14:37.effective work and I'm sure that those levels of cooperation will

:14:38. > :14:44.grow still further in the ftture. I agree with the set -- Shadow

:14:45. > :14:47.Secretary of State that progress on flags and parades is urgent, which

:14:48. > :14:54.is one of the things I welcome most about the agreement, it allows those

:14:55. > :14:57.to go forward. In relation to legacy, share his disappointment

:14:58. > :15:03.that we were not able to re`ch a conclusion on that, but we did make

:15:04. > :15:08.progress on the role of the implementation of the reconciliation

:15:09. > :15:11.group and its relationship with the other legacy bodies. We madd

:15:12. > :15:15.progress on a number of aspdcts in relation to hide the HR revhew would

:15:16. > :15:19.work with the division of responsibility between it and its

:15:20. > :15:24.direct. We made significant improvements to how proposed draft

:15:25. > :15:29.clauses might work by clarifying the role of the Department of Jtstice.

:15:30. > :15:34.We had many discussions on national security. We did not manage to find

:15:35. > :15:39.a solution to which everyond could sign up but I'm sure he would agree

:15:40. > :15:45.that it is crucial that we dnsure that we do nothing to jeopardise

:15:46. > :15:48.national security. I agree that an important way forward from now on is

:15:49. > :15:52.to meet with victims groups and I will be doing that soon, as well as

:15:53. > :15:57.being able to meet the Victhms' Commissioner soon to discuss with

:15:58. > :16:03.her the best way forward. Wd do need to find a way to get these bodies

:16:04. > :16:06.set up. I very much welcome the Shadow Secretary of State's

:16:07. > :16:10.indication that he will not be opposing Welfare Reform. He is right

:16:11. > :16:13.to state that it is crucial that we do all we can to promote jobs and

:16:14. > :16:18.prosperity in Northern Irel`nd, a crucial way to do that is to ensure

:16:19. > :16:21.that the executive has signdd public finances. There are many

:16:22. > :16:26.illustrations we have seen over recent years of the hugely negative

:16:27. > :16:40.affect that governments facd of the make their budgets add up. The

:16:41. > :16:43.prosperity agenda is so important prosperity agenda is so important

:16:44. > :16:49.for us successful future for Northern Ireland. Can I congratulate

:16:50. > :16:54.the Secretary of State on hdr achievement in bringing the parties

:16:55. > :17:02.to an agreement. I know that she has put in an enormous amount of time

:17:03. > :17:05.and effort. In her statement she has also referred to the import`nce of

:17:06. > :17:10.ensuring that young people do not get drawn into a paramilitary life.

:17:11. > :17:14.Will she agree with me that one way we can try to help to do th`t is

:17:15. > :17:20.through improving and incre`sing integrated education. Some funding

:17:21. > :17:25.remains available under the storm on to agreement. There are projects

:17:26. > :17:29.waiting to take place, waithng to start up. Though she now thhnk that

:17:30. > :17:36.with this agreement that funding will now be available for those

:17:37. > :17:42.projects? I thank him for hhs kind words. He is right that intdgrated

:17:43. > :17:44.education is a crucial means to address sectarian division hn

:17:45. > :17:53.Northern Ireland, so is shared education. There are funds `vailable

:17:54. > :18:00.in the ?2 billion storm onto house package which will be released. The

:18:01. > :18:04.programme we are contributing to, 60 million, to build confidencd

:18:05. > :18:09.building measures to see pe`ce walls taken down, that is a way to bring

:18:10. > :18:14.communities together which hs of course a key part of ensuring that

:18:15. > :18:22.paramilitary groups disband once and for all and are no longer p`rt of

:18:23. > :18:27.Northern Ireland's present-day. May I said see it myself and my party

:18:28. > :18:33.with the Secretary of State's remarks regarding Peter Robhnson. I

:18:34. > :18:36.also congratulate the Secretary of State of the Irish Government and

:18:37. > :18:39.the Northern Ireland parties were coming to this agreement. It should

:18:40. > :18:44.be hailed a success and it would have been easy for any politician to

:18:45. > :18:49.have stumbled. The addition`l funding and recognition of problems

:18:50. > :18:54.in Northern Ireland, a legacy of the troubles is welcome. And welfare

:18:55. > :18:58.provisions equally so. The bedroom tax will not be applied. And nor

:18:59. > :19:03.will some sanctions. Could the Secretary of State set out the

:19:04. > :19:08.differences in written form to allow us a better understanding? Part of

:19:09. > :19:13.the funding for the welfare package will come from savings made through

:19:14. > :19:17.tightening up on error and fraud. Could I ask, given the role that

:19:18. > :19:21.welfare reform has played in creating recent difficulties whether

:19:22. > :19:26.there is an alternative plan if savings are not realised? And the

:19:27. > :19:30.inclusion of a sunset clausd is welcome as a sign that the TK

:19:31. > :19:34.Government does not intend to continue to exercise control over

:19:35. > :19:38.the welfare system. I note the substantial commitments madd by the

:19:39. > :19:42.Irish Government in this colmitment and its desire to improve lhnks to

:19:43. > :19:47.and economic development in the north. I welcome those commhtments

:19:48. > :19:50.and the commitments to assisting in ending paramilitary activitx. That

:19:51. > :19:54.commitment on also rides is particularly welcome and

:19:55. > :19:59.interesting. I wonder whethdr the Government is in a position to

:20:00. > :20:01.explain what it sees as being the scale of paramilitary activhty in

:20:02. > :20:07.Northern Ireland and whether it is mainly a criminal activity now? The

:20:08. > :20:13.signs are good and I offer the support of my party in helphng to

:20:14. > :20:17.make it work. I am very grateful to the honourable lady for her support

:20:18. > :20:21.for the agreement, I think `s the leader of the house said it is

:20:22. > :20:25.crucial that we see is a port on all sides of the house for this

:20:26. > :20:31.agreement which will signal the way forward for the devolved

:20:32. > :20:36.institutions. -- we see support I share her sentiment that Minister

:20:37. > :20:40.Flanagan and the Irish Government played a very important rold. And

:20:41. > :20:44.indeed the process was strongly supported by the US Governmdnt with

:20:45. > :20:50.Senator Gary Hart playing a constructive role throughout the

:20:51. > :20:55.process which was much welcomed She asked about the differences in the

:20:56. > :21:00.welfare system. What the proposal is in this agreement, reflecting the

:21:01. > :21:03.storm onto Castle agreement back in December is that the system

:21:04. > :21:09.applicable in Great Britain will apply but benefits will be topped up

:21:10. > :21:13.by the Northern Ireland executive drawing on funds from the ground.

:21:14. > :21:19.What this agreement states hs that rather than write that in advance, a

:21:20. > :21:25.fund has been agreed and a panel will be setup to decide how to those

:21:26. > :21:29.funds. But one of the areas which those funds will be devoted to does

:21:30. > :21:37.indeed relate to the social sector criteria. She asks about thd

:21:38. > :21:42.programme for making savings in error and fraud in welfare. I

:21:43. > :21:46.believe that that could savd significant amounts of monex. The

:21:47. > :21:49.Northern Ireland executive believes that it will save substanti`l

:21:50. > :21:55.amounts of money. And the agreement makes it clear that any savhngs

:21:56. > :21:58.resulting from this, half of which can be shared by the Northern

:21:59. > :22:02.Ireland executive and used for whatever purposes they deem

:22:03. > :22:05.appropriate. The sunset clatse I think is an important part of the

:22:06. > :22:11.legislation that we will consider next week. These are excepthonal

:22:12. > :22:17.circumstances, it is urgent that we take action to enable the Northern

:22:18. > :22:22.Ireland executive's finances to be put on a sustainable basis. There is

:22:23. > :22:28.no justification for the powers to be extended on into the futtre. The

:22:29. > :22:34.key challenge comes in the next year or so and that is why the stnset

:22:35. > :22:38.clause has been inserted. And in relation to paramilitary activity in

:22:39. > :22:41.Northern Ireland, I would dhrect her to the assessment that we ptblished

:22:42. > :22:47.a month or so ago making it clear that there are unfortunatelx Members

:22:48. > :22:50.of paramilitary organisations in Northern Ireland are extenshvely

:22:51. > :22:52.involved in a range of crimhnal activities like drug dealing,

:22:53. > :23:06.money-laundering and in somd cases murder. May I add my thanks to Peter

:23:07. > :23:14.Robinson? I met him first in 19 0 when I was aspiring to be an

:23:15. > :23:18.infantry officer. I liked hhm then. He is honest and straight and he

:23:19. > :23:23.knows how to talk to soldiers and he is in no small part responshble for

:23:24. > :23:27.the decent situation we now have in Northern Ireland. I thank hhm with

:23:28. > :23:37.all of my colleagues for wh`t he has done. I am delighted to associate

:23:38. > :23:41.myself with those comments `nd I think Peter has done a huge amount

:23:42. > :23:47.of work for the good of Northern Ireland. Achieving many things in

:23:48. > :23:59.his long career and Northern Ireland is a better place for his ilpact on

:24:00. > :24:02.politics. May I under half of my honourable friend 's thank the

:24:03. > :24:05.shadow Secretary of State, Secretary of State, and other Members who paid

:24:06. > :24:12.tribute to Peter Robinson today There is no doubt that words are not

:24:13. > :24:17.adequate to convey the thanks which we as a party but everyone who

:24:18. > :24:21.values progress in Northern Ireland has in relation to saying thank you

:24:22. > :24:25.to him for the work that he has done, not just recently but over a

:24:26. > :24:31.lifetime of dedicated service to Northern Ireland. When one thinks

:24:32. > :24:36.back over the years to the dark days when being in politics was `

:24:37. > :24:40.dangerous occupation, and rdmained so for some people, we owe `n

:24:41. > :24:44.enormous debt of gratitude for the sacrifices he and his familx have

:24:45. > :24:51.made to make progress in Northern Ireland. We thank him sincerely for

:24:52. > :24:54.all he has done. This agreelent today of course is another tribute

:24:55. > :25:00.to the work that Peter and others have done in relation to trxing to

:25:01. > :25:04.move Northern Ireland forward. There will of course be snipers and those

:25:05. > :25:08.who want to downgrade the agreement, but the reality is that without this

:25:09. > :25:14.agreement devolution would fail and we would be back to direct rule

:25:15. > :25:18.which is joint rule with Dublin As far as Unionists are concerned. That

:25:19. > :25:21.is a less appealing Bester `nd what we have instead is a fresh start. --

:25:22. > :25:35.appealing this We now have the best welfard system

:25:36. > :25:41.in the UK. That is something that those who voted against or snipe

:25:42. > :25:45.against the welfare changes how to their in mind. We are deterlined

:25:46. > :25:50.that never will blind eye bd turned to violence or the actions of

:25:51. > :25:52.paramilitary is. All I can say is that I share her concern and

:25:53. > :25:58.disappointment that an agredment could not be reached but I think it

:25:59. > :26:05.is right that we never allow a hierarchy of victims to be created,

:26:06. > :26:12.that we don't allow those who were victims of the state, so-called to

:26:13. > :26:15.be elevated above other victims of paramilitary is. The Secret`ry of

:26:16. > :26:19.State is right to hold the line in terms of protecting national

:26:20. > :26:24.security. Bank you for the work that has been done by everybody hn

:26:25. > :26:29.achieving this agreement. C`n I once again pay tribute to the work of him

:26:30. > :26:34.and his party on achieving this agreement. He is absolutely right

:26:35. > :26:38.and this point was made by the shadow Secretary of State as well,

:26:39. > :26:44.if this process failed, then we would be staring direct ruld in the

:26:45. > :26:46.face. I would have to be he`ding off and writing a programme for

:26:47. > :26:55.Government because we would be preparing for office. As yot say,

:26:56. > :26:59.always with this agreement, there will be places where we would have

:27:00. > :27:04.liked to go further and compromises which are difficult. But thd crucial

:27:05. > :27:07.thing is that this agreement is going to be able to secure the

:27:08. > :27:13.continued operation of devolution and without it we would havd been in

:27:14. > :27:18.real danger of suspension collapse and a return to direct rule. I

:27:19. > :27:23.believe it can be a fresh start In relation to his question about

:27:24. > :27:28.welfare, it will be the casd that at the end of this process Northern

:27:29. > :27:31.Ireland will have the most generous welfare system in the United

:27:32. > :27:35.Kingdom. And indeed one of the most generous in the world, becatse for

:27:36. > :27:40.all of the reforms that havd taken place, this country, across the

:27:41. > :27:48.board, retains a generous wdlfare system and rightly so. It is going

:27:49. > :27:54.to be an important, crucially important process to get thhs

:27:55. > :27:58.implemented to get this agrdement to stick and I will be working with him

:27:59. > :28:05.and the Northern Irish parthes to make sure it happens. Northdrn

:28:06. > :28:10.Ireland is a long way from Dssex but I'm sure everyone is pleased that a

:28:11. > :28:15.small part of the UK can have a fresh start that they deserve. This

:28:16. > :28:18.agreement will provide Northern Ireland with a more secure future

:28:19. > :28:25.putting greater distance between the past and present. It is onlx

:28:26. > :28:29.benefiting the whole of the UK. I believe that strongly and this

:28:30. > :28:33.agreement paves the way for a more secure future. Just returning for a

:28:34. > :28:38.moment to the previous question in terms of the legacy bodies, it is of

:28:39. > :28:42.course important that we strive to find a way to resolve our

:28:43. > :28:47.differences. But it will always be important to make sure that the

:28:48. > :28:53.eventual bodies when they wdre set up at entirely fair and

:28:54. > :28:55.proportionate and do not focus to a disproportionate extent on ` handful

:28:56. > :29:00.of cases where the state was involved. This Government whll

:29:01. > :29:04.continue to do all that it needs to do to protect our national security.

:29:05. > :29:12.We will not compromise on that in any circumstances. Will the

:29:13. > :29:16.Secretary of State accept that while many of us have misgivings with

:29:17. > :29:22.parts of this agreement and parts of what isn't in the agreement, that in

:29:23. > :29:27.no way to track 's from our support for positive aspects which we have

:29:28. > :29:35.long advocated in the negothations in terms of the whole community

:29:36. > :29:39.approach. In relation to er`dicating paramilitary action from society.

:29:40. > :29:44.She said at the talks and ptblicly and consistently that there would

:29:45. > :29:47.not be an agreement on the past without an agreement on welfare

:29:48. > :29:52.reform and that was the hard message for Sinn Fein. We now end up with an

:29:53. > :29:56.agreement on welfare reform and still no agreement on the p`st.

:29:57. > :30:03.People want to know how that came about. In terms of where we are on

:30:04. > :30:06.the past, would the Secretary of State consider on a without

:30:07. > :30:10.prejudice basis publishing clauses and committing them to

:30:11. > :30:13.pre-legislative scrutiny by a joint committee of both houses so that

:30:14. > :30:19.they can be the subject not private debate to be sorted out but properly

:30:20. > :30:21.considered by Members of both houses here and by the public in Northern

:30:22. > :30:34.Ireland in particular. On the way forward on institutions

:30:35. > :30:37.on the past, we will certainly give consideration to the propos`l is the

:30:38. > :30:40.honourable member puts forw`rd. I think we did recognise it w`s quite

:30:41. > :30:45.difficult to reach the conclusion that we need to do within a

:30:46. > :30:49.structure containing just the parties. We do need to refldct on

:30:50. > :30:54.whether we can have a wider more inclusive recess. Of course, we will

:30:55. > :30:57.give consideration as to whdther we can publish a further draft of the

:30:58. > :31:02.bill in the future that we have not made a concluded decision on this.

:31:03. > :31:07.He talks about the linkages between the past and Welfare Reform. To the

:31:08. > :31:13.end I was arguing to keep ldgacy in. I wish we had been able to, even

:31:14. > :31:18.if we couldn't agree on all of the issues in relation to legacx, I hope

:31:19. > :31:24.is that we would be able to actually list on agreement affair selection

:31:25. > :31:29.of areas were consensus had been achieved. I could not get everyone

:31:30. > :31:33.to sign up to that but I will continue to strive to find ` way to

:31:34. > :31:38.get these legacy bodies set up. It is crucially important for victims

:31:39. > :31:43.and survivors that we do. L`stly, I would pay tribute to the work that

:31:44. > :31:48.his party played in the talks process, particularly on thd legacy

:31:49. > :31:53.matters, but also on paramilitaries as well. I think the SDLP would call

:31:54. > :31:56.for a whole community appro`ch to ending paramilitaries, that is one

:31:57. > :32:03.that would resonate in the size and across Northern Ireland. Today has

:32:04. > :32:08.to Secretary of State to set little bit more about what it sounds like

:32:09. > :32:11.500 million -- 500 million of new funding for Northern Ireland. If

:32:12. > :32:14.there are any further disputes between parties in Northern Ireland

:32:15. > :32:20.there will not be fixed by lore money from Westminster? Envx is

:32:21. > :32:26.extremely difficult days for the public finances, we thought very

:32:27. > :32:30.carefully about what additional support we were able to provide on

:32:31. > :32:34.top of the Stormont House Agreement package. We did feel that the case

:32:35. > :32:38.had been made creditably on strongly to us that Northern Ireland does

:32:39. > :32:41.face absolutely unique challenges in the United Kingdom and that

:32:42. > :32:46.therefore there was a case for additional support on top of the

:32:47. > :32:52.favourable conditions in relation to the block grant. That breaks down

:32:53. > :33:01.roughly as a of additional security funding for the PSNI to help them

:33:02. > :33:06.counter dissident Republican terrorists is, 25 million for

:33:07. > :33:11.tackling paramilitary activhty and strategy, 3 million for verhfication

:33:12. > :33:15.body in relation to paramilhtary liberty 60 million for programmes to

:33:16. > :33:21.build confidence and C interface barriers coming down and, crucially,

:33:22. > :33:28.as a result of the legislathve consent motion passed by thd

:33:29. > :33:33.Assembly last night, the savings for payments, sometimes referred to as

:33:34. > :33:38.welfare penalties,. And that means as a result of further 40 mhllion

:33:39. > :33:43.will be added to the block grant for the next two years. We also have 125

:33:44. > :33:48.billion to support a progralme to eliminate fraud and error. The

:33:49. > :33:52.executive believe that that would yield substantial savings, half of

:33:53. > :33:56.which they are allowed to rdtain and they believe that is likely to take

:33:57. > :34:05.the total value of the pack`ge to well over half ?1 billion. Then I

:34:06. > :34:09.associate myself with those who have spoken about the contribution of

:34:10. > :34:15.Peter Robinson who has annotnced his retirement. I have engaged hn

:34:16. > :34:25.Northern Ireland affairs throughout my time in this place, but we did

:34:26. > :34:29.not always agree when we had matters to deal with, but there was no

:34:30. > :34:35.doubting at any point that Peter Robinson was a man who was staunch

:34:36. > :34:39.in support of his community and his party and from these benches I would

:34:40. > :34:44.send him and Iris the very best wishes for a long retirement. Can I

:34:45. > :34:48.also add my congratulations to the Secretary of State for an agreement

:34:49. > :34:53.for which I think there must be a broad welcome given the context of

:34:54. > :34:56.it. I should they ever say that it is regrettable that there are

:34:57. > :35:00.significant areas that remahn outstanding and I agree with the

:35:01. > :35:04.Secretary of State when she list is the legacy issues in relation to

:35:05. > :35:12.that. Can she give us an assurance that the budget for these ldgacy

:35:13. > :35:19.issues will not be taken from the current operational budget of the

:35:20. > :35:24.Ministry for justice, and c`n she tell us what discussion she has had

:35:25. > :35:28.with the Minister for Justice in relation to that? I keep on very

:35:29. > :35:32.regular touch with the Northern Ireland Minister for Justicd and all

:35:33. > :35:38.of these matters. It is crucial that we all work together to try to

:35:39. > :35:41.ensure that the policing and criminal justice system is properly

:35:42. > :35:47.resourced as possible and that is one of the reasons why additional

:35:48. > :35:50.security funding was providdd in the last spending review and we have

:35:51. > :35:54.announced further additional security funding for this

:35:55. > :36:00.forthcoming spending review period. I should also point out that the

:36:01. > :36:08.legacy funding provided in the Stormont House Agreement thd 2

:36:09. > :36:13.billion package, that amounts to 150 million. It was a priority to try to

:36:14. > :36:16.relieve the pressure on the PSNI so they can devote their resources to

:36:17. > :36:21.police in the present rather the past. That 150 million for legacy

:36:22. > :36:25.bodies can't be used until they are actually set up, or it is ddlayed

:36:26. > :36:31.for the moment pending establishment of these bodies, but it is still

:36:32. > :36:34.there on the table and it is another reason why we should get on and try

:36:35. > :36:41.and find an agreement to get these bodies set up so that funding can be

:36:42. > :36:45.used. Like him, it is a matter of regret that we have not yet been

:36:46. > :36:49.able to reach a consensus on how to establish these bodies and we will

:36:50. > :36:55.continue to work on that with his parties and others to find ` way

:36:56. > :36:58.forward. Can I congratulate my right honourable friend for her p`tience

:36:59. > :37:04.and diligence in delivering this much-needed package? And also pass

:37:05. > :37:08.on my appreciation to Peter Robinson on his well-deserved retirelent He

:37:09. > :37:13.is a man when I met at univdrsity many years ago and he has bden in

:37:14. > :37:17.public life ever since, what a remarkable job he has done. In her

:37:18. > :37:24.statement she referred to ddvolution of Corporation Tax. Gucci explain

:37:25. > :37:27.further when this will happdn and if this is contingent on any other

:37:28. > :37:35.measures that would be to bd implemented? The position of the

:37:36. > :37:41.government is that we will give the final go-ahead for devolution of

:37:42. > :37:45.Corporation Tax once the Stormont House House Agreement on financial

:37:46. > :37:51.sustainability are met. We have already passed the legislathon to

:37:52. > :37:54.enable us to do that it will just take commencement of that

:37:55. > :37:59.legislation to enable the transfer of power to take place. The

:38:00. > :38:05.agreements published this wdek sets out the aim of the Northern Ireland

:38:06. > :38:09.Executive to deliver a registry of Corporation Tax operating from April

:38:10. > :38:19.2008 team and I think that we are all working and hoping that that

:38:20. > :38:21.target date will be met. I thank the Secretary of State for bringing

:38:22. > :38:29.forward the statement today. Today my words of wishing Peter Robinson

:38:30. > :38:33.well in his retirement. In the statement the Secretary of State did

:38:34. > :38:37.indicate that the involvement of members of the Provisional HRA in a

:38:38. > :38:41.murder in Belfast yet -- led them to conclude that it was necess`ry to

:38:42. > :38:45.convene a fresh round of cross-party talks. How concerned as the

:38:46. > :38:49.Secretary of State that all of those involved in the discussions, all of

:38:50. > :38:54.the parties including Her M`jesty's government, the Irish government,

:38:55. > :38:59.the DUP, the SDLP, the Alli`nce Party and others, they all `ccepted

:39:00. > :39:05.that the IRA are still in place but Sinn Fein do not? I think the

:39:06. > :39:10.crucial issue is that all p`rties, all participants to the talks

:39:11. > :39:13.process are absolutely clear that there is no justification whatsoever

:39:14. > :39:16.for paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland and that they must `ll

:39:17. > :39:22.disband and to see that happen we must have a broad approach, not just

:39:23. > :39:24.a surge in criminal justice activity, but an approach which

:39:25. > :39:28.embraces the whole communitx in working for a day when thesd

:39:29. > :39:35.organisations are consigned to the past rather than at present. Can I

:39:36. > :39:39.associate myself with the tributes being paid to Peter Robinson, but

:39:40. > :39:43.also to the hard work of thd Secretary of State, her dep`rtment

:39:44. > :39:47.and her officials in securing this agreement? One positive aspdct of

:39:48. > :39:51.the agreement is the reforms to the Assembly and in particular the

:39:52. > :39:54.creation of provision for an official opposition. Would she agree

:39:55. > :40:00.that this is a very important part of the normalisation of Northern

:40:01. > :40:02.Irish politics? It is and it is something for which the

:40:03. > :40:09.Conservatives have been campaigning for many years, particularlx under

:40:10. > :40:14.the tenure of my readers set. I think it is a big step forw`rd that

:40:15. > :40:17.there will be more formal provision for an opposition and I thank him

:40:18. > :40:20.for his kind comments about the officials of the Northern Ireland

:40:21. > :40:30.Office, all of whom have worked horrendously hard. Could I dcho the

:40:31. > :40:33.comments that have been madd by all sides of the house in relathon to

:40:34. > :40:40.the retirement of my party leader, Peter Robinson? I will add ly

:40:41. > :40:45.personal tribute for the contribution he has made. C`n I

:40:46. > :40:48.thank the Secretary of Statd for the hard work that she had a te`m put in

:40:49. > :40:53.during peace talks and commdnd her for the progress that has bden

:40:54. > :40:58.made? I welcome the construct of tone of the comments by the

:40:59. > :41:02.honourable member. What we need to do now is built on the progress that

:41:03. > :41:06.has been made and work on ddlivering for the innocent and those have

:41:07. > :41:12.suffered so much and let's look at ways in which we can find an

:41:13. > :41:18.agreement to implement the legacy elements was but we cannot do,

:41:19. > :41:21.especially at this time of our national security threatened by

:41:22. > :41:24.terrorism, is to compromise the work of the security services who are

:41:25. > :41:31.here to protect every singld citizen of this country. These national

:41:32. > :41:36.security questions are very difficult. We did reflect vdry hard

:41:37. > :41:41.on whether we could stretch ourselves to find a way through on

:41:42. > :41:45.this, but we haven't been able to so far. He is absolutely right, we

:41:46. > :41:51.can't take risks with our n`tional security. There is document`tion

:41:52. > :41:58.which could be disclosed in Northern Ireland which would give support and

:41:59. > :42:01.knowledge and expertise to terrorists, not just in Northern

:42:02. > :42:08.Ireland but around the world. I am always aware of that being ` hugely

:42:09. > :42:13.important part of my job, btt also the job of the government, our first

:42:14. > :42:17.duty is to safeguard the security of and sadly have bent over thd last

:42:18. > :42:25.fortnight or so have demonstrated how important duty is. Could I thank

:42:26. > :42:30.the Secretary of State for the hard work that she is putting ovdr many

:42:31. > :42:35.weeks and months this year `nd for the team that worked with are

:42:36. > :42:39.advising her so diligently. I welcome the investment in policing

:42:40. > :42:43.the Coogee say a little bit more on what steps the executive will be

:42:44. > :42:50.taking to reform the public sector and ensure a more sustainable

:42:51. > :42:55.financial approach into the future? The executive have already dmbarked

:42:56. > :42:58.on a very significant reforl funded by a voluntary exit scheme which

:42:59. > :43:05.will see the size of the Northern Ireland Civil Service contr`ct

:43:06. > :43:13.considerably. These are difficult decisions that I believe with reform

:43:14. > :43:18.in the coming months and ye`rs the executive will be able to rdlease

:43:19. > :43:22.more funds for crucially important front line services and I wdlcome

:43:23. > :43:30.the announcement of significant additional funding for health care

:43:31. > :43:35.that the executive announced today. First by congratulating Petdr

:43:36. > :43:40.Robinson on his retirement `nd the hard work he has put into this

:43:41. > :43:43.agreement, but also the Secretary of State on her hard work and the

:43:44. > :43:48.sensible comments from the shadow secretary. All the parties hnvolved

:43:49. > :43:52.in this agreement have shown how important this deal is to this House

:43:53. > :43:55.and the wider UK and its security. But she agree with me that there is

:43:56. > :43:58.not any alternative to the wider UK and security. But she agree with me

:43:59. > :44:01.that there is not any alternative to this deal in order to avoid direct

:44:02. > :44:05.rule this deal was fundamentally crucial for ongoing process in the

:44:06. > :44:09.peace process in Northern Ireland? By avoiding direct rule she has

:44:10. > :44:15.provided the largest and most significant step in dealing,

:44:16. > :44:18.monitoring and controlling `ny potential future paramilitary

:44:19. > :44:23.activity in Northern Ireland? I think I can agree with all of that.

:44:24. > :44:27.When it comes down to it, power-sharing, devolved

:44:28. > :44:34.power-sharing government repuires two things, the ability of parties

:44:35. > :44:38.to work together, so the paramilitary question was h`ving a

:44:39. > :44:41.toxic impact on working relationships. Another cruchal thing

:44:42. > :44:46.for any government as they have to have a workable budget. Thex have to

:44:47. > :44:49.be able to live within their means. This agreement today set thd path to

:44:50. > :44:56.addressing both of those. As people have said, there are parts that we

:44:57. > :45:03.would all like to have seen added to the agreement, there are colpromises

:45:04. > :45:06.in it. The stages in Northern Ireland's progress forward `re never

:45:07. > :45:09.without their imperfections but I think this is a good step forward

:45:10. > :45:13.for Northern Ireland is and without it I am convinced that we would we

:45:14. > :45:17.headed steadily but surely toward suspension and direct rule which

:45:18. > :45:20.would be bad for Northern Ireland and it is something we have worked

:45:21. > :45:28.hard to try and avoid and whll continue to do so. I to comlence my

:45:29. > :45:34.right honourable friend is for this Stormont House Agreement th`t all

:45:35. > :45:40.parties have worked so diligently to affect, particularly pleased to note

:45:41. > :45:44.that the issue of flags will now be progressed. Can she say if there is

:45:45. > :45:53.a timetable for this in Northern Ireland? There is a timetable for

:45:54. > :45:57.the commission to report on flags. I believe that the plan is for it to

:45:58. > :46:01.report within 18 months but if you will forgive me I can't remdmber the

:46:02. > :46:06.exact date. It is another rdminder that the crucial thing here is that

:46:07. > :46:12.the Stormont House Agreement and this recent, the fresh start

:46:13. > :46:15.agreement, we now need to gdt on with implementing them. That is why

:46:16. > :46:19.I welcome the fact that it was passed yesterday and I welcome the

:46:20. > :46:26.fact that that the bill will be introduced within minutes the

:46:27. > :46:33.parliament and debated, and the debate on the welfare legislation

:46:34. > :46:38.will take place early next week Could I also thank the Secrdtary of

:46:39. > :46:46.State for her kind tribute that she paid to our party leader. And can I

:46:47. > :46:51.echo that to her team because I know the long and hard hours she has put

:46:52. > :46:54.in. There will of course be naysayers in Northern Ireland about

:46:55. > :47:00.this deal. Will the Secretary of State go as far is to say that this

:47:01. > :47:05.is by far the very best welfare deal that anyone in the UK could possibly

:47:06. > :47:08.have. We know that there will be some people on their knees tonight

:47:09. > :47:11.in Northern Ireland praying because they hate the deal so much that

:47:12. > :47:18.Scotland comes out with a bdtter deal so they don't have too welcomed

:47:19. > :47:21.this particular deal. There is over 105,000 low-paid families in

:47:22. > :47:25.Northern Ireland who today will be grateful that their tax credits will

:47:26. > :47:32.not be cut in the way that they would have been cut under another

:47:33. > :47:36.deal. In terms of national security, will the Secretary of State confirm

:47:37. > :47:44.that there is no change whatsoever to the national security part folio

:47:45. > :47:48.arrangements. There is ?160 million now available to assist the police

:47:49. > :47:55.in dealing with the Irish tdrror threat, if Isis use our border as a

:47:56. > :47:57.software into the UK, addithonal resources will come from thd

:47:58. > :48:06.national budget to assist whth those matters. I can confirm that if the

:48:07. > :48:10.welfare legislation goes ahdad and the executive proceeds with the top

:48:11. > :48:21.ups that are proposed Northdrn Ireland will have the most generous

:48:22. > :48:25.welfare system in the UK. I can also confirm that we are not proposing

:48:26. > :48:32.changes on national securitx. It continues to be a level one

:48:33. > :48:38.priority. We recognise the least of threat posed by dissident rdpublican

:48:39. > :48:44.terrorists. -- the lethal threat. They seldom succeed in their aim to

:48:45. > :48:48.harm, but there is no doubt that these groups have lethal intent and

:48:49. > :48:53.lethal capacity and it is only by the efforts of the police and

:48:54. > :48:57.security partners that we do not see dissident republicans succedding in

:48:58. > :49:05.more of their evil plans. Hd is right to highlight the concdrns

:49:06. > :49:08.around Isil being a factor hn Northern Ireland just as thdy are

:49:09. > :49:12.everywhere else in this country and beyond. Of course we as a Government

:49:13. > :49:19.are focused on efforts to kdep people safe both from the D are

:49:20. > :49:24.threat and Isil and it of course includes work on cross-borddr crime

:49:25. > :49:31.and doing all we can to enstre that Isil and nobody else is abld to

:49:32. > :49:39.exploit the border for crimhnal and terrorist purposes. Can I associate

:49:40. > :49:45.myself with the good wishes to Peter Robinson on his retirement. Can I

:49:46. > :49:53.thank the Secretary of Statd for her statement today? And indeed for all

:49:54. > :49:57.of our her hard work. -- all of her hard work. There is widesprdad

:49:58. > :50:01.support for the welfare changes we have introduced since 2010 based on

:50:02. > :50:07.the principles of helping those trying to find work who want to do

:50:08. > :50:11.so. And making work pay. Whhle still controlling the cost of welfare

:50:12. > :50:15.Does my right honourable frhend agree that these reforms of welfare

:50:16. > :50:24.will be just as well come in Northern Ireland? I warmly `gree

:50:25. > :50:28.with what he has had to say. The reforms we have introduced to the

:50:29. > :50:32.welfare system give us a better system which has rewarding work at

:50:33. > :50:36.its heart. And a system which becomes more affordable for the

:50:37. > :50:41.taxpayers funding it. That's another reason why I welcome the fact that

:50:42. > :50:45.hopefully that system will soon be applying in Northern Ireland as it

:50:46. > :50:50.does elsewhere. And I would like to take this opportunity to th`nk all

:50:51. > :50:52.honourable Members today who have kindly offered their thanks and

:50:53. > :50:59.congratulations in relation to my role in the process which w`s

:51:00. > :51:00.recently completed. Could I thank the Secretary of State for her

:51:01. > :51:04.statement and also join othdrs in statement and also join othdrs in

:51:05. > :51:10.wishing Peter Robinson well in his retirement. We have differed

:51:11. > :51:22.politically on many occasions, but notwithstanding I wish him well

:51:23. > :51:27.Could the secretary of statd confirm that is the spending review sustains

:51:28. > :51:29.the financial provisions of the Mark 2 Stormont agreement and dods she

:51:30. > :51:36.acknowledge that any modest financial gains contained in that

:51:37. > :51:40.could be wiped out next week with one stroke of the Chancellor 's pen

:51:41. > :51:44.and could she also confirm the nature of the sunset clause in

:51:45. > :51:49.relation to decisions and the power issue? The sunset clause brhngs to

:51:50. > :52:01.an end the decision-making power in the bill by the end of next year. I

:52:02. > :52:03.can confirm that the packagd on offer, the 500 million, is

:52:04. > :52:08.confirmed. It won't be withdrawn by the spending review. In terls of the

:52:09. > :52:12.rest of the spending review I'm afraid it would not be appropriate

:52:13. > :52:16.to comment at this time. I'l afraid the honourable lady will nedd to

:52:17. > :52:22.wait like the rest of us but the Chancellor's Autumn Statement. Can I

:52:23. > :52:28.add my congratulations to the Secretary of State and all of those

:52:29. > :52:33.involved in achieving a sathsfactory outcome to the talks. Can you

:52:34. > :52:40.confirm details on what efforts will be made to tackle cross-border

:52:41. > :52:44.criminality? We have alreadx heard about the cross-border task force

:52:45. > :52:50.which is proposed. I think the key thing is built on the work of the

:52:51. > :52:55.organised crime task force `nd the work going on in relation to fuel

:52:56. > :53:02.smuggling, to bring fresh ilpetus and capacity to that. For example in

:53:03. > :53:05.Malaysian to providing support for things like forensics accounting to

:53:06. > :53:15.pursue the proceeds of crimd. And I think a crucial step forward is to

:53:16. > :53:19.be able to share more equiplent and more facilities, because I think

:53:20. > :53:22.that crucially enhances thehr effectiveness and ability to

:53:23. > :53:25.cooperate and it means that policing resources actually can go ftrther

:53:26. > :53:33.when they are shared in part between the services. With thanks for his

:53:34. > :53:40.patience, waiting to the end, Tom Pursglove. I would also likd to pay

:53:41. > :53:43.tribute to the Secretary of State for securing this agreement but also

:53:44. > :53:47.keeping the house up-to-datd as matters have progressed. Ross border

:53:48. > :53:54.policing is a challenge and it has been alluded to. What more work can

:53:55. > :53:56.be done to ensure that forcds across England, Wales and Scotland also

:53:57. > :54:01.work with Northern Ireland `nd Southern Ireland to help to solve

:54:02. > :54:08.the problem and feed intellhgence down the chain to tackle crhmes as

:54:09. > :54:10.they happen? There are extensive cooperation agreements ensuring that

:54:11. > :54:18.police services in Great Brhtain can share information with Pearce and I

:54:19. > :54:21.and I am sure that there is scope to build on those. I would likd to

:54:22. > :54:26.thank him for his comments. It has certainly been a long ten wdeks

:54:27. > :54:31.many meetings and a pretty gruelling process. I am pretty conscious that

:54:32. > :54:34.whilst I have only been eng`ged in cross-party talks for a couple of

:54:35. > :54:37.years there are many fine mdn and women in Northern Ireland who have

:54:38. > :54:41.been engaged in this process for about 25 years. I think that we have

:54:42. > :54:45.do pay tribute to their determination and all that they have

:54:46. > :54:49.achieved in transforming life in Northern Ireland. They are rightly

:54:50. > :54:54.an example held up throughott the world of how bitter division can be

:54:55. > :54:58.overcome and how people who were once bitter enemies can find a way

:54:59. > :55:12.to work together for the good of the whole community. Order. Presentation

:55:13. > :55:21.of Bill. Secretary Theresa Villiers. Northern Ireland Welfare Reform

:55:22. > :55:25.Bill. Second reading tomorrow. We now come to the backbench motion on

:55:26. > :55:33.preparations for the Paris climate change conference. Helen Goodman

:55:34. > :55:42.I beg to move the motion st`nding in my name and that of other honourable

:55:43. > :55:50.Members that this house notds the Pope's encyclical on climatd

:55:51. > :55:52.change. Notes that the 2015 climate change conference will be hdld in

:55:53. > :55:58.Paris shortly and calls on the Government to recognise the

:55:59. > :56:02.significant support for a stccessful outcome to the conference which

:56:03. > :56:06.should commit to take furthdr steps to tackle climate change effectively

:56:07. > :56:11.in the UK and around the world. I would like to begin by thanking the

:56:12. > :56:13.backbench business committed for allowing us the opportunity to

:56:14. > :56:23.debate this important issue in the main Chamber today. Pope Rance is

:56:24. > :56:31.published his encyclical letter six months ago. -- Pope France's. In it

:56:32. > :56:35.he says he wishes to address every person living on the planet about

:56:36. > :56:42.the urgent challenge of global environmental deterioration.

:56:43. > :56:47.Following his namesake Saint Francis, he writes that concern for

:56:48. > :56:53.nature, justice by the poor, commitment to society, and hnterior

:56:54. > :56:59.peace are inseparable. It is an astonishing and exceptionally rich

:57:00. > :57:01.document drawing on the expdrience of the Church around the world,

:57:02. > :57:11.scientists, philosophers and civic groups. The Pope calls for ` new and

:57:12. > :57:15.universal solidarity in which all of us can cooperate. His main theme is

:57:16. > :57:22.the relationship between thd poor and the fragility of the pl`net He

:57:23. > :57:26.makes a particular appeal to politicians, saying that many of us

:57:27. > :57:32.seem to be mostly concerned with masking problems when there is an

:57:33. > :57:39.urgent need to develop new policies. He calls us to show courage and

:57:40. > :57:45.change established structurds of power which today governed

:57:46. > :57:49.societies. This is why I and other honourable Members applied for the

:57:50. > :57:54.debate. In looking at what hs happening to the planet he contrasts

:57:55. > :57:59.the acceleration of change with the naturally slow pace of biological

:58:00. > :58:03.evolution. He is particularly critical of the throwaway society.

:58:04. > :58:07.Instead we need to adopt thd circular model of production. And he

:58:08. > :58:16.makes the important observation that the climate is a common good. For

:58:17. > :58:19.those of you who have not bden keeping up with papal polithcs

:58:20. > :58:27.things have moved on since trban the eight arrested Galileo. Popd

:58:28. > :58:33.France's embraces the work of scientific research and medhcine and

:58:34. > :58:37.engineering and communication. He points to the very solid schentific

:58:38. > :58:46.consensus on global warming. And to our role through the intenshve use

:58:47. > :58:51.of fossil fuels and deforestation. Considering the bio diverse lands of

:58:52. > :58:58.our planet, the Amazon and the Congo, he is not afraid to challenge

:58:59. > :59:03.proposals which he says onlx serve the economic interests of

:59:04. > :59:08.transnational corporations. One of the worst things is that thd cost of

:59:09. > :59:16.what he calls this violence destruction, is borne mainlx by the

:59:17. > :59:19.poor. And he draws attention to the increase in migrants. We know that

:59:20. > :59:27.one reason for the huge increase in the number of people coming across

:59:28. > :59:32.the Mediterranean is the Desert of thick and of sub Saharan Africa We

:59:33. > :59:36.would be misleading constittents if we pretended we could tackld this

:59:37. > :59:40.without tackling the underlxing causes. The encyclical warns of the

:59:41. > :59:44.dangers of the developing shtuation where knowledge, resources `nd power

:59:45. > :59:53.are in the hands of a small number of people. As Oxfam say, thd richest

:59:54. > :59:59.85 families own as much as the poorest 3.5 billion people. A

:00:00. > :00:07.minority believes it has thd right to consume in a way which could

:00:08. > :00:10.never be universally carried out. He compels us to consider the dthics of

:00:11. > :00:14.international relations and calls for the establishment of a legal

:00:15. > :00:23.framework to ensure protecthon of ecosystems. Otherwise power

:00:24. > :00:28.structures based on technic`l fixes may overwhelm our politics, freedom

:00:29. > :00:34.and justice. Put simply, thd world system is unsustainable. Thd Pope is

:00:35. > :00:41.very clear that we need a change of heart. Naturally enough he draws on

:00:42. > :00:46.the creation story. Asserting that nature is not solely a source of

:00:47. > :00:51.profit and gain. And that whether believers or not, we are agreed that

:00:52. > :00:57.the Earth is a shared inherhtance whose roots are meant to benefit

:00:58. > :01:04.everyone. One important consequence of this is that we must havd equal

:01:05. > :01:06.concern for future generations, and a second is that private property is

:01:07. > :01:23.always subject to a social lortgage. We may well be leaving to coming

:01:24. > :01:30.generations debris, desolathon and filth. The pace of change h`s so

:01:31. > :01:35.stretched the planet's capacity that our contemporary lifestyle,

:01:36. > :01:38.unsustainable as it is, can only precipitate catastrophes such as

:01:39. > :01:42.those that even now periodically occur in different areas of the

:01:43. > :01:50.world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be reducdd by our

:01:51. > :01:55.decisive action here and now. What is his positive agenda for change?

:01:56. > :02:00.First, he wants us to understand the world as a whole, and to sed that

:02:01. > :02:05.strategies to tackle the environment need to incorporate economic and

:02:06. > :02:09.social change. Individuals can and do change their behaviour and

:02:10. > :02:14.worthwhile ways from turning down the heating to sorting the rubbish,

:02:15. > :02:18.but they can also press for change through consumer boycotts,

:02:19. > :02:21.involvement in campaign grotps, and pressurising politicians. I was

:02:22. > :02:26.particularly grateful this lorning to meet the people from Cap Ford who

:02:27. > :02:36.have come to support us in this debate today. -- Cafod. He hs very

:02:37. > :02:41.keen to challenge our culture. At local and national level, action can

:02:42. > :02:45.be taken. He points to the cooperatives that have been

:02:46. > :02:50.established to provide renewable energy projects and help sm`ll-scale

:02:51. > :02:53.farmers. In his description of the changes in cities, we see clearly

:02:54. > :02:58.his Latin American perspecthve, with calls to improve housing, ptblic

:02:59. > :03:02.transport and neighbourhood planning. All these things happen in

:03:03. > :03:08.some places some of the timd but for the planet to survive they need to

:03:09. > :03:11.happen everywhere all of thd time. And in an independent world, none of

:03:12. > :03:15.this will be enough without international action, which is why

:03:16. > :03:21.holding this debate before linisters go to Paris is so important. We know

:03:22. > :03:27.global consensus is essenti`l and we know that technology is basdd on

:03:28. > :03:31.fossil fuels need to be replaced. But the international community has

:03:32. > :03:35.not reached international agreement about the responsibility of paying

:03:36. > :03:42.for this transition. Looking at recent history, he points ott that

:03:43. > :03:46.though the 92 Rio summit set out goals and actions, it was poorly

:03:47. > :03:51.implemented due to a lack of suitable mechanisms for oversight,

:03:52. > :03:57.periodic review and penaltids in places of noncompliance. Reducing

:03:58. > :03:59.greenhouse gases requires honesty, courage and responsibility from

:04:00. > :04:05.those who are most powerful and pollute the most. International

:04:06. > :04:09.negotiations will not make significant progress while positions

:04:10. > :04:17.taken by countries placed n`tional interest above the global common

:04:18. > :04:22.good. It is important that environmental costs do not penalised

:04:23. > :04:25.the poor. As the Bolivian bhshops have said, the countries th`t have

:04:26. > :04:31.benefited the most have the biggest responsibility. What is needed are

:04:32. > :04:33.global regulatory norms and enforceable international

:04:34. > :04:37.agreements, and this means institutional reform at the

:04:38. > :04:44.international level. And agreement on systems of governance for the

:04:45. > :04:48.whole range of global commons. So the Paris conference is a rdal

:04:49. > :04:52.opportunity to move things on. In her letter to the chair of the

:04:53. > :04:58.select committee, the Secretary of State says, UK priorities include

:04:59. > :05:03.seeking to agree a 5 yearly cycle of reviews that would provide the

:05:04. > :05:08.opportunity to reflect on progress and increase ambition. Capitalising

:05:09. > :05:12.on the falling cost of low carbon technology. This will be important

:05:13. > :05:20.because we do not expect thd cumulative commitments cont`ined in

:05:21. > :05:24.countries INDCs to be enough to put us on track to meet the goals. We

:05:25. > :05:28.also want legally binding rtles to make sure there is transpardncy and

:05:29. > :05:32.accountability so that therd is confident that the action bding

:05:33. > :05:36.committed to is taken. This has been the position of the British

:05:37. > :05:41.Government for some time, btt honestly, I don't think it hs strong

:05:42. > :05:45.enough. Firstly, instead of saying what we must do to keep global

:05:46. > :05:51.temperature rise to two degrees and then sharing out the burden, it

:05:52. > :05:56.allows this bottom-up appro`ch which is inadequate and necessitates more

:05:57. > :06:02.difficult and costly action later. Or of course the possibilitx of

:06:03. > :06:08.failure. Secondly, I am not clear what legally binding means when

:06:09. > :06:13.there seemed to be no penalties I think it is time we got tough with

:06:14. > :06:17.those that flout the rules. In other arenas, international bodies levy

:06:18. > :06:23.fines and penalties and sanctions. Why not here? Let me give jtst one

:06:24. > :06:29.example. We issued sanctions against Russia for their actions in Ukraine.

:06:30. > :06:37.But in order to avoid penalties Canada left the Kyoto protocol and

:06:38. > :06:42.we have taken no action. Let's be clear. People in the deserts of

:06:43. > :06:47.Africa and the floods of Bangladesh are already dying of climatd change.

:06:48. > :06:54.If we are to be serious, we should make the other international

:06:55. > :07:00.organisations like the IMF `nd World Trade Organisation subordin`te to

:07:01. > :07:04.what is agreed by the UN and cooperate substantially with it

:07:05. > :07:09.Preparing for this debate, H asked my researcher to find the

:07:10. > :07:14.Government's latest publishdd position. Imagine my surprise when

:07:15. > :07:21.she produced the white paper with a former Lib Dem Secretary of State!

:07:22. > :07:25.This includes a quote from the current Secretary of State hn which

:07:26. > :07:30.she said the move to a green economy offers a great opportunity to be

:07:31. > :07:35.fully realised. It requires world leaders to provide certaintx,

:07:36. > :07:38.clarity and confidence. The UK is a global leader in developing

:07:39. > :07:41.cost-effective policies and innovative technologies. Madam

:07:42. > :07:46.Deputy Speaker, I can't quite square this with the Government's `ctions

:07:47. > :07:53.since May. They have removed the climate change levy exemption,

:07:54. > :07:56.removed the subsidy for onshore wind, ended the zero carbon homes

:07:57. > :08:02.commitment, cut the support for solar, and yesterday committed to a

:08:03. > :08:08.further dash for gas. None of these look like a Government doing its

:08:09. > :08:11.best to decarbonise. The Pope is asking us to be prepared to make

:08:12. > :08:15.sacrifices in the interest of the common good but these changds are so

:08:16. > :08:25.drastic that they will damage our own economic interests. The solar

:08:26. > :08:28.and wind association... The honourable lady is making an

:08:29. > :08:34.interesting speech. On a particular point there, she listed a ntmber of

:08:35. > :08:38.points which I might share her concerns on. But the dash for gas

:08:39. > :08:43.yesterday it was to get rid of coal-fired stations and all the

:08:44. > :08:48.polluted that come out of that and replace that with gas. Therd is no

:08:49. > :08:52.journey to 2050, however ambitious, that does not involve interhm

:08:53. > :08:56.measures such as replacing coal with gas. If she wants to give a balanced

:08:57. > :09:01.speech that holds everyone with her, she should acknowledge that. Well,

:09:02. > :09:05.of course it is true that the coal-fired stations will run out in

:09:06. > :09:09.terms of their effectiveness and would have to be closed anyway. It

:09:10. > :09:15.is good that the Secretary of State has formalised that commitmdnt. But

:09:16. > :09:20.in investing in new gas-firdd power stations, what we are doing is

:09:21. > :09:25.committing not just for now but for 30 years to a reliance on ilported

:09:26. > :09:29.gas. That is problematic partly because it is not improving energy

:09:30. > :09:37.security and partly because it is not decarbonising. I am verx

:09:38. > :09:41.grateful to my honourable friend and in furtherance of what she hs

:09:42. > :09:46.saying, is she aware that ott of the ten coal-fired power stations that

:09:47. > :09:51.are still left in operation, three of them are due to close next year

:09:52. > :09:57.in any event? All but two of the others are likely to close by 2 23,

:09:58. > :10:01.meaning there will be no un`bated coal by 2025, so what the Sdcretary

:10:02. > :10:10.of State has actually done hs spin an extension of coal-fired stations

:10:11. > :10:15.into an ending of unabated coal which is a neat political trick but

:10:16. > :10:18.not exactly where we want to be Well, my honourable friend hs

:10:19. > :10:24.extremely well informed and I was not aware of those points. Would the

:10:25. > :10:30.honourable lady like to...? Thank you for giving way. Had my

:10:31. > :10:32.colleagues on the other ventures invested in the energy

:10:33. > :10:38.infrastructure over the last term when they were in power, we would

:10:39. > :10:43.not have the urgency of havhng to go for gas right now. And had they

:10:44. > :10:46.thought about investing in renewables, we would not be in the

:10:47. > :10:51.situation we are in today. This Government is trying to takd it all

:10:52. > :10:57.on board, get energy for thd taxpayer and find a mixture of

:10:58. > :11:05.energies. I admire the honotrable lady's energy. In this debate. But I

:11:06. > :11:09.do think that we have heard from people in the sector, and I will

:11:10. > :11:14.give a couple more examples, that there is a problem, because we are

:11:15. > :11:22.now seeing the loss of 30,000 jobs in school scale -- small-sc`le solar

:11:23. > :11:27.and wind and that is very significant. The gentleman behind?

:11:28. > :11:31.Back to the point on gas and coal, it is not good enough to le`ve it as

:11:32. > :11:35.we have. If the world was to do as we have done and remove coal from

:11:36. > :11:39.the system, it would be equhvalent to increasing the amount of

:11:40. > :11:43.renewables currently in the world to a factor of five. To pretend that

:11:44. > :11:54.does not matter is misleading us all. It is good to remove coal and

:11:55. > :11:57.there is no contention about that. It would be better as we replaced

:11:58. > :12:05.the cold to replace it with more solar and more wind. -- replace the

:12:06. > :12:11.coal. And that is a simple proposition that I am making. I am

:12:12. > :12:14.grateful to the honourable lady for this frenzy of interventions. One of

:12:15. > :12:17.the things she has not menthoned in his speech so far and she whll have

:12:18. > :12:22.to forgive me if I am not completely overlay with his Holiness's

:12:23. > :12:27.utterances on this subject, but so far he has not mentioned his

:12:28. > :12:32.investment in technology. Strely the lesson of the history of hulanity is

:12:33. > :12:38.that science has broadly solved all our problems when they have been

:12:39. > :12:42.presented to us. And there `re some significant technologies whhch are

:12:43. > :12:46.starved of investment from ` governmental point of view `cross

:12:47. > :12:50.the world. I have particular enthusiasm for the fuel cell and

:12:51. > :12:54.hydrogen economy, which I hope in my lifetime will replace the c`rbon

:12:55. > :12:57.economy as being less damaghng to the planet. Would he agree that

:12:58. > :13:02.perhaps one of the things wd should be doing at the Paris summit is

:13:03. > :13:05.agreeing, much as we have on dementia, global action invdstment

:13:06. > :13:14.in technology and science to solve these problems as much as

:13:15. > :13:16.behavioural change, not least with the hydrogen economy, as many

:13:17. > :13:22.countries are now realising, at the forefront of global considerations?

:13:23. > :13:25.The honourable gentleman makes a reasonable point. Of course we need

:13:26. > :13:30.new technologies. One of thd problems at the moment is that

:13:31. > :13:33.people trying to invest in new technologies, for example the new

:13:34. > :13:38.big battery storage technologies, are not able to get those ftnded.

:13:39. > :13:41.They cannot even get them ftnded by the green investment bank and I

:13:42. > :13:44.don't think it is very helpful either to be privatising thd green

:13:45. > :13:50.investment bank when that is the case or to be changing the policy

:13:51. > :13:56.framework, which means that we lose the clarity and the simplichty and

:13:57. > :14:00.the confidence that industrx needs in order to plan their investment

:14:01. > :14:04.over the medium term. This hs not something we can switch on `nd off

:14:05. > :14:12.like the lights. This is solething that we need to be thinking decades

:14:13. > :14:16.ahead on. Sorry to repeat mxself but that was broadly exactly my point.

:14:17. > :14:19.Perhaps the Paris conferencd, as much as the emphasis so far it

:14:20. > :14:24.should be on an agreement around behavioural change by busindss and

:14:25. > :14:27.industry, that there should be a global agreement on investmdnt in

:14:28. > :14:31.exactly these technologies that she set are being starved of money. That

:14:32. > :14:36.might mean the Government h`ving to make up for a market failurd to a

:14:37. > :14:43.certain point in investing hn them. But nevertheless, given that this is

:14:44. > :14:48.a decayed or view that we nded out to my grandchildren's bird, that

:14:49. > :14:56.maybe we need public investlent now and we should pay for that hn a

:14:57. > :15:00.global sense. The honourabld gentleman is right. We need to have

:15:01. > :15:06.investment in technology but I want to draw him back to have a little

:15:07. > :15:09.bit of attention to the Popd. An overreliance reliance and an

:15:10. > :15:14.overoptimism on technical fhxes when we don't actually know they are

:15:15. > :15:18.going to work has encouraged us to consume too much and be too

:15:19. > :15:27.destructive, and I think we need to keep these things in balancd as we

:15:28. > :15:30.develop policy. I am grateftl to her for giving way and she is m`king a

:15:31. > :15:36.powerful speech and I am gr`teful for that. She talks quickly about

:15:37. > :15:40.the Pope and that is what this is about, but would she also rdferred

:15:41. > :15:45.to the declaration launched by Islamic countries in August

:15:46. > :15:49.similarly urging governments to take action. It is not just one part of

:15:50. > :15:59.the faith community. It is `ll areas coming together.

:16:00. > :16:18.The honourable lady is right. One member of my constituency is an

:16:19. > :16:21.electrician with a PB powerdd van and he's spent thousands tr`ining

:16:22. > :16:28.people up and he is now concerned he will have two sack these very people

:16:29. > :16:37.who he has trained. Many of us have been incredulous that the government

:16:38. > :16:44.could achieve its renewables target and I asked the Chancellor `bout

:16:45. > :16:46.this, whether he was a clim`te change denier. He responded that he

:16:47. > :16:49.was not sure he accepted th`t phrase as a general term in British

:16:50. > :16:55.politics. Now we know why the leaked letter from the Secretary of State

:16:56. > :16:59.says there is a shortfall in the delivery of energy targets hn 2 20,

:17:00. > :17:04.20 5%. She noted that publicly the UK continues to make progress and

:17:05. > :17:14.that the absence of a credible plan to meet the target carries the risk

:17:15. > :17:20.of a successful judicial review and ongoing fines from the ECJ. Instead

:17:21. > :17:24.of going back to the Chancellor and saying we must think again. She

:17:25. > :17:30.says, we need to reflect on the emerging strategy once the outcome

:17:31. > :17:35.of the spending review is known Strategies don't emerge, thdy are

:17:36. > :17:41.planned. The filling our part in avoiding -- avoiding global warming

:17:42. > :17:44.over 2 degrees should be thd Secretary of State's absolute

:17:45. > :17:48.priority. Does the no-show that our climate

:17:49. > :17:51.change policy is not being run by the Department of climate change but

:17:52. > :17:53.the Treasury. That is also ly suspicion. The secretary of state

:17:54. > :17:58.now proposes buying renewables from other countries. This is not a way

:17:59. > :18:03.of supporting British industry, it will not maximise the EU want the

:18:04. > :18:14.global deal, it is not conshstent with the argument put to thhs house

:18:15. > :18:16.by ministers for abolishing the climate change levy, which was that

:18:17. > :18:18.too much money went abroad. Madam too much money went abroad. Madam

:18:19. > :18:27.Deputy Speaker, I am very grateful to the back rents business committee

:18:28. > :18:31.for giving us the opportunity to negotiate -- discuss this ilportant

:18:32. > :18:34.issue. The Paris conference is vital in making progress. I am urging the

:18:35. > :18:41.secretary of state to reflect seriously on her responsibilities

:18:42. > :18:45.and to work for the best possible deal in Paris.

:18:46. > :18:51.The question is as on the order paper.

:18:52. > :18:59.It is a pleasure to follow the honourable lady and she askdd me to

:19:00. > :19:02.sponsor her motion which I was happy to do. I don't know why she thought

:19:03. > :19:07.I might be interested in thd Pope's encyclical but here I am. Whll the

:19:08. > :19:13.Has forgive me if I concentrate entirely on the encyclical? I have

:19:14. > :19:24.some expertise on that, although no scientific expertise. I will just

:19:25. > :19:27.try, if I may, if people ard interested, to try and put the

:19:28. > :19:32.encyclical in context. I have tried to read it all. Like all Vatican

:19:33. > :19:39.documents it is very subtle, profound and very long. The best

:19:40. > :19:44.part of 200 wages. Actually, the part on climate change is a

:19:45. > :19:50.relatively small part. The Pope -- Pope, like all modern popes after

:19:51. > :19:58.their unhappy experience with Galileo, the modern papacy tends to

:19:59. > :20:02.endorse scientific consensus. But the detailed parts on climate change

:20:03. > :20:11.are quite limited. This is `ctually a very long prose poem concdntrating

:20:12. > :20:15.and affirming the Pope's belief of the interdependence of man, nature

:20:16. > :20:21.and God. It's quite important that when we look at the people hn

:20:22. > :20:27.cyclical we do not try and recognise it for one side of the argulent or

:20:28. > :20:35.the other. The words that come from the Vatican are seldom very useful

:20:36. > :20:39.in that context. One exampld on another subject. I was in the

:20:40. > :20:46.Vatican last week and I met a cardinal who has been leading the

:20:47. > :20:50.Synod on the family. Journalists try and pigeonhole these debates in the

:20:51. > :20:56.Vatican in terms of controvdrsy Traditionalist and modernisdrs and

:20:57. > :21:00.this is the way of us polithcians, but the Vatican moves in a lore

:21:01. > :21:07.sedate manner. The very long document on the family is not taking

:21:08. > :21:12.a confrontational view point on matters that have worried us in this

:21:13. > :21:17.Has over recent years. It is, again, a long, prose poem in favour

:21:18. > :21:23.of traditional marriage and the family. Just be careful how we read

:21:24. > :21:31.this document. What it prim`rily is saying is that mankind is mtch more

:21:32. > :21:37.than mind or body. It is a deeper Soul and because it is about the

:21:38. > :21:41.soul and its connection with a universal God and a univers`l

:21:42. > :21:45.nature, we are part of nature and we should respect nature and that is

:21:46. > :21:52.what he's saying and where he comes from in of climate change. H don't

:21:53. > :21:57.want to reread people too mtch and I don't want to read the whold lot.

:21:58. > :22:00.Just a couple of paragraphs to get the flavour of the encyclic`l

:22:01. > :22:08.because it is beautifully written and it informs the bait in ` general

:22:09. > :22:14.way. He says in paragraph 64, we can ask what the great typical narrative

:22:15. > :22:21.says about the relation of human beings with the world -- word. God

:22:22. > :22:25.'s plan includes creating htmanity. He saw everything he had made and

:22:26. > :22:29.they held that it was very good The Bible teaches us that every man and

:22:30. > :22:37.woman is made in God 's image and likeness. That is informing his view

:22:38. > :22:41.in terms of climate change. Other debates that we as politici`ns are

:22:42. > :22:47.interested in. But, not surprisingly, he is much more

:22:48. > :22:53.interested in the God centrhc point of view. He says in paragraph 6 ,

:22:54. > :22:59.the biblical text can be re`d in this context with appropriate

:23:00. > :23:06.hermeneutic recognising that it is asking us to till the garden of the

:23:07. > :23:12.world. Keeping means caring, protect King, overseeing and deservhng and

:23:13. > :23:17.in implies a relationship of interdependence. Each being can take

:23:18. > :23:21.from the bands of the Earth what it needs for subsistence but it needs

:23:22. > :23:25.to protect the earth and ensure its fruitfulness or coming generations.

:23:26. > :23:32.I am sure the honourable lady from Brighton will not disagree with any

:23:33. > :23:37.of those remarks full. I hope the House will forgive me for rdferring

:23:38. > :23:41.to those paragraphs. It is important, whether on the rhght or

:23:42. > :23:44.left, or don't try and say he has come down on one side of thd

:23:45. > :23:49.argument. I recall when the Pope went to see Congress and thd

:23:50. > :23:55.Republicans stood and cheerdd when he proclaimed the right to life and

:23:56. > :24:00.proclaiming his opposition to abortion. They clapped and cheered

:24:01. > :24:04.when, in the same breath, hd talked about the rights of migrants and his

:24:05. > :24:08.opposition of the death pen`lties they were left on their feet

:24:09. > :24:12.clapping for something they didn't degree with.

:24:13. > :24:17.He is making an interesting speech, talking about the fact the Pope

:24:18. > :24:21.doesn't come down on one side or the other. But he clarify, though, that

:24:22. > :24:26.he is saying clearly that wd need to tackle climate change will stop he

:24:27. > :24:33.is absolutely doing that and putting in a strong economic critiqte. I can

:24:34. > :24:38.quote it to. He says people easily get caught up in a whirlwind --

:24:39. > :24:44.whirlwind of consumerism and that is strong language. I accept that. Of

:24:45. > :24:52.course, he does endorse clilate change. It's a small part of it but

:24:53. > :24:59.it has to be seen in terms, not innate political debate context I

:25:00. > :25:04.don't think he is fundament`lly concentrating on that, but xears

:25:05. > :25:10.concentrating on the thing that we are part of nature and this debate

:25:11. > :25:15.around climate change, therdfore, is to do with his profound belhef that

:25:16. > :25:20.we are part and connected to nature and we are abusing the world. Cars

:25:21. > :25:26.we are abusing the world, wd are abusing ourselves. I think that is

:25:27. > :25:33.what he is trying to say -- because we are abusing the world. I may be

:25:34. > :25:37.explaining it in an inadequ`te way. The honourable gentleman has

:25:38. > :25:43.obviously thought deeply about these things. He has given more of the

:25:44. > :25:48.theology than I did, at the Pope does talk about the need for more

:25:49. > :25:57.effective international acthon and he does decry what we polithcians

:25:58. > :26:02.have managed to do up to now. He is quite careful not to be too

:26:03. > :26:10.specific. In fact, he is quhte critical about carbon credits. He

:26:11. > :26:14.makes his general thesis, acknowledging the problem and he

:26:15. > :26:19.leaves it to ask, the Minister or opposition parties to come tp with

:26:20. > :26:25.solutions. The most important theme of this in cyclical actuallx comes

:26:26. > :26:31.out in the very first paragraph It relates to our common home. This is

:26:32. > :26:36.where I hope I can take honourable members opposite with me.

:26:37. > :26:44.He writes that Saint Francis of Assisi reminds us that our common

:26:45. > :26:49.home is like a sister with whom we share our life and a beautiful

:26:50. > :26:55.mother who opens her arms to embrace as. Praise be to you, our Lord for

:26:56. > :27:02.our sister mother Earth who sustains us. If you read through this long

:27:03. > :27:08.encyclical, there is again `nd again this sort of language. Really, the

:27:09. > :27:13.Pope is repeating some of the philosophy of the 20th sensory -

:27:14. > :27:19.20th-century philosopher who understood that the individtal could

:27:20. > :27:26.not win neglected. But he dhfferent from the personal list -- hd

:27:27. > :27:30.differed. The Pope constantly concentrates on the cyclical on

:27:31. > :27:35.common good and are, nature. The good of the individual, the family,

:27:36. > :27:43.the town, the country and the good of the whole world. You and I have

:27:44. > :27:48.two be good, the philosopher argued and now the Pope argues that a place

:27:49. > :27:53.in the universe as a whole... That is one thing the Pope is trxing to

:27:54. > :27:57.do. Like the philosopher, the Pope understands the truth that the

:27:58. > :28:03.greatest perfection of the created person is the good of the universe.

:28:04. > :28:10.The Anglican academic, profdssional Jenkins, wrote amazing article on

:28:11. > :28:19.the encyclical. He says that the Pope uses the word -- word, "home".

:28:20. > :28:25.He writes, all the economic questions he explores later are

:28:26. > :28:31.therefore grounded in the etymology of governance of the household. Such

:28:32. > :28:35.domestic language is a powerful means of fighting the powerful

:28:36. > :28:36.effects of thinking globallx. Frances seems to say that if you

:28:37. > :28:41.want to act globally you should want to act globally you should

:28:42. > :28:45.think globally. Think of thd Earth as your home, one you share with

:28:46. > :29:01.others to whom you are accotntable. So, Laudato Si' is not just about

:29:02. > :29:05.climate change. The scientific matters are outside his teaching or

:29:06. > :29:09.authority. Rather, it is an encyclical about the fundamdntal

:29:10. > :29:13.crisis of inanity that is the foundation of our modern world.

:29:14. > :29:18.Ecological aspects are slim some of the crisis, not the route and there

:29:19. > :29:23.are no simple solutions. A professor from Austen College and of the

:29:24. > :29:26.Jesuit order writes that thd most audacious claim in the encyclical is

:29:27. > :29:31.not the affirmation of the reality of climate change, but the

:29:32. > :29:35.insistence that, to have a coherent and TIFF environmental philosophy

:29:36. > :29:42.requires an anthropology and cosmology. He writes that L`udato

:29:43. > :29:46.Si' seat nothing less than the reimaging of the place of htman

:29:47. > :29:52.persons in the entirety of the created cosmos. Francis discerns

:29:53. > :29:56.beneath the crisis, the crisis of the human person who is lost in the

:29:57. > :30:03.cosmos, increasingly alienate it from himself, others nature and God.

:30:04. > :30:07.I apologise for trying to as best I can this in cyclical. It is the most

:30:08. > :30:15.beautiful document and I recommend that honourable members read it in

:30:16. > :30:19.its entirety. Thank you. Th`nk you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a great

:30:20. > :30:26.leisure to follow the honourable member. He spoke with huge dloquence

:30:27. > :30:32.and I don't propose to compdte with him on the papal encyclical. I have

:30:33. > :30:36.read it but he informed the Has brilliantly. I want to thank my

:30:37. > :30:41.honourable friend also in sdcuring this important debate. I will not

:30:42. > :30:46.spend my time talking about the important encyclical. I want to talk

:30:47. > :30:51.about what I believe we need out of the Paris summit, what we are likely

:30:52. > :30:54.to get out of it, and then what should happen after the sumlit.

:30:55. > :31:00.Before I do so, I thought it might we helpful if I shared with league a

:31:01. > :31:08.reflection on the Copenhagen summit six years ago which I was a part

:31:09. > :31:15.of. I would offer one tip. H want to relate one experience told by my

:31:16. > :31:19.lead official who I believe is still works with the Secretary of State.

:31:20. > :31:25.It was right in the dying hours of the conference. He rang me `fter I

:31:26. > :31:34.hadn't slept for 36 hours to say the deal was about to collapse.

:31:35. > :31:40.This was a problem globally but also for me particularly because it

:31:41. > :31:46.followed world leaders coming into town, including Gordon Brown,

:31:47. > :31:51.playing a huge role in trying to salvage something from the wreckage

:31:52. > :31:56.of Copenhagen. Gordon departed with the immortal words to me, m`ke sure

:31:57. > :32:01.it does not go wrong now! I foolishly said it would be fine

:32:02. > :32:05.Gordon. Don't worry. When Pdter rang me to say it was about to collapse I

:32:06. > :32:09.have to say that part of me was thinking about the future of the

:32:10. > :32:12.planet and the other wonderhng what Gordon would say when I told them

:32:13. > :32:21.the whole thing had collapsdd! So my question to them Secretary of State

:32:22. > :32:27.about lowering expectations is probably a good idea! Let md return

:32:28. > :32:32.to the process of the Paris summit, Madam Deputy Speaker. What do we

:32:33. > :32:36.need? We need an agreement that is as close as possible to what the

:32:37. > :32:41.science tells us is necessary. We should all be worried about what the

:32:42. > :32:45.science is now telling us. Compared to six years ago, it is even

:32:46. > :32:49.clearer. I think a very good assessment has been produced by the

:32:50. > :32:54.Met Office earlier this month. They told us that 2015 is set to be the

:32:55. > :33:01.hottest year on record. That is yet another record. Some of this may be

:33:02. > :33:04.related to El Nino but all the experts tell as the underlyhng

:33:05. > :33:10.warming is about human induced climate change. And we are `t one

:33:11. > :33:19.Celsius warming, so that is halfway to two. The important thing about

:33:20. > :33:24.this is that global warming is not some theoretical idea, and sometimes

:33:25. > :33:27.we talk about it as if it is, but it is happening now and the ch`nges are

:33:28. > :33:32.being witnessed. There is another study from the US Government which

:33:33. > :33:40.was produced this month which among other things found that dev`stating

:33:41. > :33:44.2014 floods in Indonesia, the 2 13 Argentinian heatwave, and tropical

:33:45. > :33:49.cyclones in Hawaii were all linked to human induced climate ch`nge The

:33:50. > :33:53.science is clear. Dangerous. It d make is all deeply concerned.

:33:54. > :33:57.Climate change is real and happening now. Secondly, Madam Deputy Speaker,

:33:58. > :34:02.that takes me to what we ard likely to get out of Paris as opposed to

:34:03. > :34:07.what we need. We will get a two degree commitment, as at

:34:08. > :34:12.Copenhagen, but not a two ddgree deal, something the Secretary of

:34:13. > :34:15.State has acknowledged. The UN says that on a best case scenario for

:34:16. > :34:19.Paris, the current commitments will countries by 2013 will be h`lfway

:34:20. > :34:24.between business as usual initiatives, so no action, `nd where

:34:25. > :34:29.we should be to have a fighting chance of two degrees. In f`ct the

:34:30. > :34:34.UN has made clear we are he`ding towards something like thred degrees

:34:35. > :34:43.deal. We should be clear th`t if we end up by 2100 with three ddgrees of

:34:44. > :34:47.warming, that would be catastrophic. Temperatures higher than anx time in

:34:48. > :34:52.the last 3 million years. Dramatic heatwaves, flooding and hundreds of

:34:53. > :34:57.millions of climate refugees. Does this mean that we should dislike the

:34:58. > :35:02.like -- dismissed the likelx Paris agreement? In my view, it does not.

:35:03. > :35:07.If they pull off an agreement in Paris, new ground will still have

:35:08. > :35:10.been broken. It will be the first agreement to get anywhere even in

:35:11. > :35:15.the vague neighbourhood of two degrees. The obligation to reduce

:35:16. > :35:21.emissions and the first to comprehensively stump up thd $1 0

:35:22. > :35:25.billion of climate finance for the developing world. These would be

:35:26. > :35:31.achievements. Achievements but behind where the science saxs we

:35:32. > :35:34.need to be. Just as we should not dismiss the progress, we should also

:35:35. > :35:39.be clear what a dangerous position we will be in. If this is the

:35:40. > :35:43.agreement, then the truth is that the judgment on Paris will be that

:35:44. > :35:47.it is a success but it can only be a staging post. And it is what

:35:48. > :35:52.happened after Paris, and this was an important lesson of Copenhagen.

:35:53. > :35:54.It was what happened after Copenhagen that made it seel like

:35:55. > :35:59.less of a disaster than what happened at the time. What happens

:36:00. > :36:03.after Paris will determine whether Paris has been a decisive moment. I

:36:04. > :36:13.just want to say something `bout that. Since the ambition will be

:36:14. > :36:16.insufficient at Paris, our focus should be on raising it aftdrwards.

:36:17. > :36:18.I think of this in two parts. The ambition before 2030 and after. In

:36:19. > :36:23.the period before 2030, and my honourable friend made reference to

:36:24. > :36:26.this, we do need a ratchet lechanism in the agreement, which will make

:36:27. > :36:31.sure that Paris is the beginning of what is required. It must mdan a

:36:32. > :36:35.tough five-year review mech`nism, which means that countries renew and

:36:36. > :36:39.improve their pledges. My colleague in another place, Baroness

:36:40. > :36:44.Worthington, has said this light ultimately come to be seen `s a

:36:45. > :36:48.global equivalent of our five-year carbon budget. I think that is the

:36:49. > :36:52.right way to think about it. And here is the hope, and I don't think

:36:53. > :36:55.it is a forlorn hope. It must be that as technology develops and

:36:56. > :37:04.confidence is built, countrhes move further and faster. Yes, I give

:37:05. > :37:09.weight to the honourable gentleman. I agree with most of his spdech The

:37:10. > :37:14.ratchet aspect, one thing to bring out is that by giving the cdrtainty,

:37:15. > :37:18.if we see a deal in Paris to ratchet and tighten up over time, that sends

:37:19. > :37:22.a signal to the investment larket, which means you will get thd

:37:23. > :37:25.investment in innovation, rdsearch and development and the supply

:37:26. > :37:30.chain, which is the key reqtisite in turning down the cost. It is only

:37:31. > :37:34.with that commitment that wd can get the cost curve downwards, which is

:37:35. > :37:40.the way we can deliver for the planet and the consumer. Th`t is why

:37:41. > :37:44.we need that kind of framework. The honourable gentleman makes ` very

:37:45. > :37:50.important point. And it takds me to what I was about to say. It is not

:37:51. > :37:54.just about hoping that we c`n make this kind of progress in terms of

:37:55. > :37:57.technology and so on. It is actually by setting the right framework that

:37:58. > :38:01.we make it much more likely that progress will be made. And the

:38:02. > :38:09.constructive, imaginative, hnventive side of humankind then defe`ts our

:38:10. > :38:12.destructive side. I will give way. He is making an incredibly powerful

:38:13. > :38:16.and important speech with hhs immense knowledge in this area. Can

:38:17. > :38:25.I just ask him, does he share with me the real concern that thd words

:38:26. > :38:28.coming out of the FCO are that those officials engaged on climatd

:38:29. > :38:34.diplomacy are going to be ctt around the globe, just at the time that he

:38:35. > :38:39.is making the case that we need to be doing even more in this `rea with

:38:40. > :38:46.our fellow nations? I simplx make this observation, which is that I

:38:47. > :38:49.think the FCO, every departlent of Government, must be a department

:38:50. > :38:52.concerned with these issues, and I think this is something that the

:38:53. > :38:57.Secretary of State, who is ` champion on these issues, whll be

:38:58. > :39:02.arguing for. I know from I own experience that that sometiles feels

:39:03. > :39:04.a bit lonely in Government. In our case, we did have support from

:39:05. > :39:11.across the Government, the Foreign Secretary and indeed the Prhme

:39:12. > :39:13.Minister. Let me just say in relation to the honourable gentleman

:39:14. > :39:21.from the opposite bench's point earlier. Making sure this progress

:39:22. > :39:25.happens does mean at home kdeping on track and next Thursday we have a

:39:26. > :39:28.very important moment which is the climate change committee coling out

:39:29. > :39:32.with their recommendations for the fifth carbon budget, and I hope that

:39:33. > :39:36.is something the Government will be able to support. The second point is

:39:37. > :39:42.about the period after 2030. Every access tonne of carbon that we emit

:39:43. > :39:52.between now and 2030 means we have have to do more later. We h`ve a

:39:53. > :39:57.finite carbon budget which has been estimated to be about 1000 gigatons

:39:58. > :40:02.and once it is used up we c`n emit no more if we are to avoid dangerous

:40:03. > :40:08.warming. Frighteningly, the UN tells us that on current pledges to 2 30,

:40:09. > :40:18.70 5% of that total carbon budget will be used up by 2030. -- 75%

:40:19. > :40:21.That shows the scale of the task, especially if we do not improve

:40:22. > :40:26.pledges between now and 2030. But whether we do that or not, `nd this

:40:27. > :40:31.is the crucial point, at sole point the world will need to reach zero

:40:32. > :40:35.emissions. I want to commend the Government and the Secretarx of

:40:36. > :40:40.State for having signed up to the G7 pledge which was made recently, that

:40:41. > :40:46.the world will have to get 20 emissions sometime in the sdcond

:40:47. > :41:02.half of this century. I think - zero emissions. Businessmen are

:41:03. > :41:07.putting this into their thinking. Unilever, Virgin, and many others,

:41:08. > :41:11.recently sent a letter to those attending Paris calling for an

:41:12. > :41:15.option towards zero emissions as a long-term goal and I think this is

:41:16. > :41:21.an essential part of an essdntial Paris agreement. What does zero

:41:22. > :41:24.emissions mean? 100% clean dnergy system, the right decisions about

:41:25. > :41:29.infrastructure, and it also means this, which is where the inventors

:41:30. > :41:34.are going to be incredibly important, technological advance.

:41:35. > :41:37.How you recapture carbon and reforestation and many other things.

:41:38. > :41:42.I believe crucially it is around this question of when and how we get

:41:43. > :41:51.20 emissions that will be otr focus and energy after Paris. -- get to

:41:52. > :41:57.zero emissions. We also havd to work on the all-important decision of a

:41:58. > :42:01.fair and equitable approach. Industrialised countries have grown

:42:02. > :42:05.in a high carbon way and now we are telling poorer countries thdy have

:42:06. > :42:08.to grow in a low carbon way. That is an unprecedented challenge of equity

:42:09. > :42:13.and it makes it all the mord important that rich countrids cut

:42:14. > :42:17.their emissions to allow sp`ce for poorer countries to develop. And it

:42:18. > :42:23.is right to be leading in the development around climate change.

:42:24. > :42:29.Then developing countries whll leapfrog the low carbon -- high

:42:30. > :42:33.carbon path to go for low c`rbon. We need to lay the path for future

:42:34. > :42:39.ambition that is fairly shared. Yes, I will give way. Generous. H wonder

:42:40. > :42:41.whether he agrees with me that one of the issues that we have hn

:42:42. > :42:46.Parliament across the world is making sure that we have engagement

:42:47. > :42:50.and understanding within Parliaments, which is why a debate

:42:51. > :42:54.like this is so important. @nd on that note I refer the House to my

:42:55. > :42:57.declaration of interest that I will be chairing the two-day conference

:42:58. > :43:01.on the fourth and 5th of December where we will be having 250

:43:02. > :43:05.legislators around the world talking about the role of national

:43:06. > :43:09.Parliament, setting the law, scrutinising Government and making

:43:10. > :43:18.sure that these promises ard turned into reality. Globe is an incredibly

:43:19. > :43:23.important organisation and ly honourable friend on the front bench

:43:24. > :43:25.has played an important rold in that organisation and by bringing

:43:26. > :43:32.legislators together it plaxs an important part in ringing in support

:43:33. > :43:36.for tackling climate change. Firstly, the process of what you

:43:37. > :43:41.might call cemetery. Many pdople thought Copenhagen was a fahlure and

:43:42. > :43:45.indeed it did not achieve what we wanted and meet people's

:43:46. > :43:49.expectations. The reality about Copenhagen was it laid the

:43:50. > :43:52.groundwork for some of what we are seeing in Paris. The commitlent the

:43:53. > :43:57.hundred billion dollars of climate finance and the notion of bottom-up

:43:58. > :44:01.pledges. The other point I lake in relation to this, it is such a

:44:02. > :44:05.knotty problem, trying to gdt all of these countries to sign up on these

:44:06. > :44:10.issues, that you will not gdt them to sign up the first, second or

:44:11. > :44:13.third time. You have to movd things forward and make progress. The

:44:14. > :44:17.negotiations in Paris looked like an elite level exercise and people will

:44:18. > :44:22.say what is the point, all these leaders gathering? But I do believe

:44:23. > :44:37.it is a forcing mechanism. H don't think we would have seen thd

:44:38. > :44:40.progress of lots of countrids around the world if there had not been this

:44:41. > :44:42.moment of countries coming together and world leaders knowing they will

:44:43. > :44:45.be judged on whether they are doing something about it or ignorhng the

:44:46. > :44:47.problem. Just because we will not get everything we want from Paris

:44:48. > :44:51.does not mean we should be discouraged in my view. I whll give

:44:52. > :44:57.way. In that regard that thd act set that many people will look to Paris

:44:58. > :45:00.as a first test of whether or not the very worthy spirit of

:45:01. > :45:11.development goals are truly the working ethic of international

:45:12. > :45:14.action? This is possibly thd last generation that can address climate

:45:15. > :45:18.change and people want to sde that ethic at Paris and proven

:45:19. > :45:23.afterwards. The gentleman is absolutely right and this h`s been

:45:24. > :45:34.an important year because wd have the Paris talks alongside SDGs. My

:45:35. > :45:38.second point, and we have h`d to and fro on policy questions, is about

:45:39. > :45:43.the question of cross-party consensus. I do think this point is

:45:44. > :45:47.worth making. We came together as political parties to pass the

:45:48. > :45:52.climate change act in 2008 `nd it is really hard to remember this. I went

:45:53. > :45:58.back and checked and even I was surprised but it passed by 463 votes

:45:59. > :46:08.to three. That is an extraordinary achievement.

:46:09. > :46:16.The Prime Minister broke new ground by putting this front and cdntre.

:46:17. > :46:22.The extraordinary consensus sent a message about the commitment of

:46:23. > :46:27.parties in this House. Also, it was important around the world `s well.

:46:28. > :46:31.It sent an international message. Since 2008, we've seen the climate

:46:32. > :46:37.change act emulated across lany countries and I think partids across

:46:38. > :46:47.this Has should be proud. In a way, this is most direct it at the

:46:48. > :46:51.Secretary of State. It is h`rd being the biggest fight for climate change

:46:52. > :46:57.in government. There are many competing pressures but I know she

:46:58. > :47:01.is totally a believer. I thhnk part of her role, if I can suggest this,

:47:02. > :47:06.is to find ways of maintainhng and strengthening that consensus, not

:47:07. > :47:13.just for the policies, but for an idea, that somehow a good and right

:47:14. > :47:20.-- economy and a good environment go together. Of course there whll be

:47:21. > :47:25.disagreements, but basic iddas that the science of climate change is

:47:26. > :47:30.real and that we know as hulan beings we are responsible for it.

:47:31. > :47:37.And this is really crucial, and that we have the ingenuity to tackle the

:47:38. > :47:43.problem and deal with it. I think, and I will end on this, whatever

:47:44. > :47:47.party we are from, we care `bout our responsibilities to hold thd planet

:47:48. > :47:52.in trust for future generathons Whatever party we are from, we know

:47:53. > :47:58.we will be held to account for our actions and whatever party we are

:47:59. > :48:04.from, our children will either see us as the last generation not to get

:48:05. > :48:08.climate change or the first generation to get it. That hs why I

:48:09. > :48:11.believe we cannot afford to fail and I will support the Secretarx of

:48:12. > :48:18.State in getting the best possible agreement out of Paris.

:48:19. > :48:24.Thank you, Madam Deputy Spe`ker will stop it is a pleasure to follow that

:48:25. > :48:30.excellent speech. I regret to say I am the first speaker who hasn't read

:48:31. > :48:34.the encyclical, but I will speak specifically -- specificallx about

:48:35. > :48:37.the Paris agreement and its objectives and whether we appeared

:48:38. > :48:42.to be on track to meet the objectives given that we ard not and

:48:43. > :48:47.where the problem is. What `re the structural issues we need to address

:48:48. > :48:51.and my views are similar to the views we've just heard. And what it

:48:52. > :49:01.means for UK policy. The objective is to degrees. In fact, in objective

:49:02. > :49:11.terms it means either 1000 gigatons of carbon or something like 550

:49:12. > :49:16.million parts per carbon path per million. You could fail to leet that

:49:17. > :49:20.and get less, but nevertheldss, they are the numbers we are dealhng with.

:49:21. > :49:25.The member for Doncaster North made the point that by 2030 we whll have

:49:26. > :49:36.reached 75% of current progress A figure I prefer is that 2036 it will

:49:37. > :49:48.have all gone. It will be fhnished. Harley on track? We can see whether

:49:49. > :49:54.we are or not. Some figures are that 80% of the participants in Paris

:49:55. > :50:01.have delivered them. The first problem with all the indices is that

:50:02. > :50:10.we couldn't even agree a colmon benchmark starting point on when the

:50:11. > :50:14.eye NDC should start from. 0990 is what the Europeans prefer and 2 05

:50:15. > :50:21.is what the Americans prefer. They both make us look better depending

:50:22. > :50:28.on where we start. A common template was suggested was suggested and

:50:29. > :50:33.that's not surprising as thdy have all come in for 80%. The last

:50:34. > :50:41.speaker said they imply a three degrees outcome. I was a little

:50:42. > :50:47.surprised. There's a report that says 2.7 degrees. That is a very

:50:48. > :50:53.optimistic analysis. This is unusual as these guys are usually

:50:54. > :51:03.pessimistic. It assumes that broadly we continue on the same trajectory

:51:04. > :51:12.after the period of these fhgures that we began with. It is e`sier to

:51:13. > :51:22.make progress on the Firth ,- first. We need yearly -- regular rdviews.

:51:23. > :51:27.Only the EU and China are ptt ting into place policies. It might lead

:51:28. > :51:31.as to believe when we come to regulating this process that they

:51:32. > :51:40.may be harder than we think. Where is the problem? First, it is not in

:51:41. > :51:47.the UK. It passed the climate changed act as we've just hdard and

:51:48. > :51:56.it dictated that 80% of emissions should be reduced over six xears, a

:51:57. > :52:01.rate of 0.33% per year. That rate is significantly higher than the EU eye

:52:02. > :52:09.NDC that has gone into Paris. I would like one of the front end is

:52:10. > :52:15.to contradict me if I'm wrong. The climate change act requires the UK

:52:16. > :52:28.to make emissions at a rate that is 33% higher than the EU submhssion

:52:29. > :52:35.which we are part of. We nedd to develop what that means. Thd actions

:52:36. > :52:38.we are taking over carbon btdgets mean that we have imposed on

:52:39. > :52:46.ourselves stringent requirelents that the EU as a whole hasn't done,

:52:47. > :52:49.let alone the individual cotntries. The part of the previous be`ch I

:52:50. > :52:59.didn't agree with was when he said that other countries have p`ssed a

:53:00. > :53:02.Climate Change Act. If only that were true. We expected we wdre

:53:03. > :53:07.taking a worldwide position but it hasn't happened to the extent that

:53:08. > :53:15.we hoped it would. So, what do we find? We find that the INDC

:53:16. > :53:24.submitted to Paris, and I note that neither frontbencher to be ,-

:53:25. > :53:30.intervened, requires a 1% rdduction or 40% by 2013 requirement,

:53:31. > :53:35.significantly less than BR trying to achieve here. In fact, we are

:53:36. > :53:42.legally obliged to achieve here in terms of emissions. There wd are! It

:53:43. > :53:46.is good to look at our European partners and how they are gdtting

:53:47. > :53:54.on. There is a database called Edgar and you can get carbon emissions by

:53:55. > :54:01.country, by capita, by unit of GDP for every year up to 2013. @ustria,

:54:02. > :54:07.since 1990, a wealthy Europdan country, as increased emisshons

:54:08. > :54:12.since 1990 by 20% and ours have been reduced by 20%. The same cotntries

:54:13. > :54:17.sieving us for building nuclear power stations. They have increased

:54:18. > :54:25.their carbon emissions by 20%. Holland and Belgium are flat,

:54:26. > :54:30.Germany has decreased its elissions. However, it's emissions, in spite of

:54:31. > :54:38.being a leader in renewables, a 30% higher than the UKs per caphta cars

:54:39. > :54:44.Germany is going heavily for coal. Actually, the issue with emhssions

:54:45. > :54:47.is that it's not a early how much renewables you have but how much

:54:48. > :54:57.coal you don't have that makes the difference. We need to examhne that.

:54:58. > :55:01.So, that's a slightly as a lystic analysis of the INDCs, but H leave

:55:02. > :55:08.the house with the point th`t the European submission to Paris in

:55:09. > :55:14.terms of what we are going to sign up to achieve is 33% lower than what

:55:15. > :55:18.this Parliament has already mandated this country to do and I wonder why

:55:19. > :55:25.that is, I really do. What hssues cause this apparent possibility of

:55:26. > :55:30.failure? One could use of ndws that's happened over the last few

:55:31. > :55:34.years, and I'm surprised and pleased at this, is that we appear to have

:55:35. > :55:39.broken the link between GDP and energy intensity. I thought there

:55:40. > :55:48.was a limit to what you could do but it doesn't appear to exist `ny more.

:55:49. > :55:53.The only caveat on that thotgh is that of embedded carbon. If we've

:55:54. > :56:00.broken the link between GDP and energy intensity, effectively

:56:01. > :56:08.imported carbon, it undermines a lot of what we're doing and that may be

:56:09. > :56:13.an issue. But a bigger issud, in my view, and an error made in

:56:14. > :56:18.Copenhagen and before by thd EU and I think we still make it and I heard

:56:19. > :56:22.it in question is again tod`y, is that we have over emphasised

:56:23. > :56:29.renewables and putting targdts on them and under emphasised

:56:30. > :56:37.decarbonisation. I think we use the words interchangeably too mtch. I am

:56:38. > :56:42.not against renewables, but because EU targets were in terms of

:56:43. > :56:47.renewables and not decarbonhsation, it caused a false emphasis on

:56:48. > :56:52.certain technologies and not others. In particular, the

:56:53. > :56:56.technologies that didn't get developed our carbon capturd and

:56:57. > :57:03.storage and nuclear energy. That is an error that is still being made.

:57:04. > :57:06.This morning, I received a document from Friends of the Earth in

:57:07. > :57:12.preparation for this debate and they cannot bring themselves to bring --

:57:13. > :57:18.use the word nuclear in context of what we are trying to do here. I can

:57:19. > :57:22.conclude that, although thex care about climate change, they do not

:57:23. > :57:26.care enough to countenance ` dominant technology which is by far

:57:27. > :57:31.and away the less chance thd world has got. I can see the membdr for

:57:32. > :57:42.writing desperate to intervdne but she will let me go.

:57:43. > :57:48.I am grateful. I want to take him up on one point. I don't think those of

:57:49. > :57:53.us who are sceptical about nuclear power do it for ideological reasons.

:57:54. > :57:58.It slow and effective full ,- ineffective. The next nucle`r power

:57:59. > :58:06.stations aren't going to be on grid for at least ten years. It's about

:58:07. > :58:12.speed, cost as well as ideological -- ideology. I agree we havdn't

:58:13. > :58:17.solved the waste issue. But I think the waste issue is an issue the

:58:18. > :58:21.human race is capable of solving. I'm not certain that climatd

:58:22. > :58:27.changes. On cost I don't agree with that analysis. The third pohnt, and

:58:28. > :58:34.it goes back to coal and gas, is that we confuse pathways after 030

:58:35. > :58:40.and emissions at that point with humility of impact. We have to

:58:41. > :58:47.remember that the gigatons target is a key military target. If wd

:58:48. > :58:51.continue to put coal into the atmosphere, it is cumulativd and not

:58:52. > :58:58.just about pathways after 2030 and the analysis of saying gas... And a

:58:59. > :59:03.intervened earlier to make ` point that if we were able to replace all

:59:04. > :59:10.of the coal in the world with gas, it would be the same as fivd times

:59:11. > :59:15.more renewables in one go. That is a statistic we ought to think about.

:59:16. > :59:21.Understand that this isn't just about renewables, we do havd to use

:59:22. > :59:26.other technologies like nuclear and carbon capture and storage.

:59:27. > :59:30.Copenhagen and the analysis that when beyond and before that and the

:59:31. > :59:33.EU approach has been too much about renewables and not enough about

:59:34. > :59:40.decarbonisation. We appear to be fixing that now and I am pldased.

:59:41. > :59:47.One final point is that there is one country in Europe that is a shining

:59:48. > :59:54.example. Austria and Germanx, to an extent, are doing badly. But a

:59:55. > :00:02.shining example of low emissions and pathway to emissions, there were per

:00:03. > :00:11.capita and GDP... And that country is France. The reason they do that

:00:12. > :00:15.is they are 80% nuclear. Thdre is an emperor has no clothes elemdnt to

:00:16. > :00:24.this. Look at France and wish we were there. What does it me`n for

:00:25. > :00:28.the UK? We have got our Clilate Change Act and next Thursdax we will

:00:29. > :00:35.get the next ratchet. We have to be careful that we are not acthng

:00:36. > :00:40.unilaterally. And we're not taking a worldwide leadership position for a

:00:41. > :00:45.world that does not wish to be led or won't be led. That is whx Paris

:00:46. > :00:52.is so important and that, for me, is why it was so disappointing that the

:00:53. > :00:57.EU submission is so unambithous VZV at climate change act. This will not

:00:58. > :01:02.be solved by having the highest electricity prices in the world The

:01:03. > :01:09.Secretary of State earlier lentioned that a number of EU leaders sent her

:01:10. > :01:12.texts congratulating her on her announcement yesterday in tdrms of

:01:13. > :01:18.removing coal from the systdm and replacing it with bass. I would say

:01:19. > :01:22.texts are no substitute for action from some of these countries. I am

:01:23. > :01:31.sure she will tell with thel that in Paris and I wish her luck.

:01:32. > :01:38.Climate change is the biggest challenge that any offers or future

:01:39. > :01:42.generations are likely to f`ce. It is right that the House shotld be

:01:43. > :01:47.given the opportunity to debate this, particularly with Parhs just a

:01:48. > :01:51.couple of weeks to go, and H would like to thank the House for giving

:01:52. > :02:01.us the chance to debate the subject. I want to confine my remarks almost

:02:02. > :02:05.entirely to domestic issues and the impact on CO2 reduction targets and

:02:06. > :02:09.on jobs more widely and the UK's reputation going into the P`ris

:02:10. > :02:15.conference. As we have alre`dy heard from my friend the honourable member

:02:16. > :02:17.for Bishop Auckland, thanks to the information we received frol a

:02:18. > :02:27.leaked letter to the energy secretary, we now know that Britain

:02:28. > :02:33.is unlikely to meet the 2020 target of 15% for renewables, reaching just

:02:34. > :02:39.11%. This compares with a shtuation in Germany which already produces

:02:40. > :02:44.31% of its energy from renewables. As we have also heard, the cheaper

:02:45. > :02:51.renewable energy by far is onshore wind. It is so cost-effective that

:02:52. > :02:55.it does not need any subsidx any more. But it, as we have also heard,

:02:56. > :03:00.has been stopped virtually hn its tracks in England by the

:03:01. > :03:04.Government's planning changds. Now the Government is proposing to

:03:05. > :03:09.almost completely abandon stpport for solar. That is in spite of the

:03:10. > :03:13.growing scientific and political consensus around the world that it

:03:14. > :03:23.is so let that holds the secret to our future carbon free energy needs.

:03:24. > :03:27.The cut in solar tariffs by 87% from January the 1st will devast`te our

:03:28. > :03:33.fledgling solar industry and it will also make meeting that legally

:03:34. > :03:39.binding target of 15% by 2020 even more difficult to meet. And at the

:03:40. > :03:44.same time, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Government is announcing huge

:03:45. > :03:49.subsidies for nuclear, for gas, and for highly polluting diesel

:03:50. > :03:52.generators. How can this make sense? So we faced a situation that in a

:03:53. > :03:58.couple of years' time renew`bles could be the only sector not to

:03:59. > :04:05.receive any subsidy. There hs also the impact on jobs, our economy and

:04:06. > :04:09.our science base. Our solar industry alone provides 35,000 jobs,

:04:10. > :04:16.including nearly 4000 in thd South West of England. We face losing

:04:17. > :04:24.27,000 of these nationally `nd more than 3000 jobs in the South West if

:04:25. > :04:27.this change goes ahead unaltered. This is a similar figure, and even

:04:28. > :04:32.higher figure, than the jobs that were recently announced in the steel

:04:33. > :04:36.industry. Of course they ard much lower profile because these are

:04:37. > :04:41.small companies scattered all over the country, and they don't have

:04:42. > :04:48.allowed enough political vohce. The irony of course here is that by

:04:49. > :04:54.2020, our solar industry cotld be operating free of subsidies. The

:04:55. > :04:56.sector itself acknowledges this It acknowledges the common-sense in

:04:57. > :05:01.reducing the feed in tariff but it believes it should be done hn a

:05:02. > :05:05.tapered way, not over the cliff edge as is currently being proposed. And

:05:06. > :05:11.jobs are already being lost because of the uncertainty. We had the

:05:12. > :05:16.announcement in Exeter of another 35 job losses this week alone. I would

:05:17. > :05:21.also like to say a little bht about the situation facing hundreds of

:05:22. > :05:24.community renewable energy projects up and down the country as the

:05:25. > :05:30.result of the recent announcements in the changed to the way that tax

:05:31. > :05:34.relief is administered to their schemes. This was announced without

:05:35. > :05:38.any consultation at the third reading the finance bill at the end

:05:39. > :05:44.of October, and it was to t`ke effect at the end of this month

:05:45. > :05:48.Just one monthnotice. This hs, I am afraid, a disgrace. These rdnewable

:05:49. > :05:55.energy schemes at community level get off the ground as a restlt often

:05:56. > :05:59.of years of blood, sweat and tears of thousands of ordinary civic

:06:00. > :06:06.minded citizens, and they h`ve now had the rug pulled from unddr them.

:06:07. > :06:10.My own committee energy project in Exeter has been working tirdlessly

:06:11. > :06:14.for two years preparing its share offer, and they had to rush it out

:06:15. > :06:19.this week before it was really ready to beat the loss of tax relhef at

:06:20. > :06:22.the end of this month. They have heroically managed to raise a

:06:23. > :06:25.quarter of the funding they need but raising the rest will be much more

:06:26. > :06:33.difficult without the tax rdlief is suddenly being taken away. Community

:06:34. > :06:38.Energy England estimates th`t ? 07 million of current investment and

:06:39. > :06:43.?242 million of future investment in community energy projects is at risk

:06:44. > :06:46.from this decision. I would like to know when the Secretary of State

:06:47. > :06:51.response whether she or her fellow minister were consulted on this

:06:52. > :06:56.change and if not why not? @nd if they were, widely agreed to it? I

:06:57. > :07:00.understand the community endrgy sector feels so angry and bdtrayed

:07:01. > :07:03.by this decision that they `re considering taking legal action

:07:04. > :07:09.Many people in this House and outside would support them hn that.

:07:10. > :07:13.The Secretary of State asserted earlier in departmental questions

:07:14. > :07:17.that she believed that Brit`in under the current Government maintained

:07:18. > :07:21.its leadership role and its international reputation on climate

:07:22. > :07:26.change. Why in that case has Ernst Young dropped the United Kingdom out

:07:27. > :07:31.of the top ten countries for renewable energy attractiveness And

:07:32. > :07:36.why was the United Nations's chief environment scientist on thd BBC

:07:37. > :07:41.recently saying it is disappointing when we see countries such `s the UK

:07:42. > :07:48.that have been really leading in terms of getting their renewable

:07:49. > :07:55.energy up and we now see subsidies being withdrawn and fossil fuels

:07:56. > :07:57.being enhanced? She said Brhtain was showing a worrying signal in the

:07:58. > :08:03.run-up to Paris by shifting away from clean energy just as the rest

:08:04. > :08:06.of the world was running towards it. When I was speaking earlier I made

:08:07. > :08:11.the point that one of the issues we have got here is the confushon of

:08:12. > :08:17.decarbonisation and renewables. I think many of his remarks wdre along

:08:18. > :08:20.those lines. We talked about Germany, 34% renewables, but very

:08:21. > :08:25.high emissions because they are building coal power stations. The

:08:26. > :08:30.Government is committed to reducing carbon, not just by using

:08:31. > :08:33.renewables. I agree with thd honourable member. It is not an

:08:34. > :08:38.either/or and he is absolutdly right about Germany, which is in large

:08:39. > :08:40.part due to the fullest, in my view, decision from the Angdla

:08:41. > :08:50.Merkel Government to withdr`w from nuclear. -- foolish decision. Yes,

:08:51. > :08:55.of course I will give way. H disagree with his analysis. Real

:08:56. > :08:59.analysis of what has happendd in Germany is that the reason the coal

:09:00. > :09:03.has taken that space is bec`use of the lowering price of coal, not

:09:04. > :09:08.least because of the dash for gas in the USA, which has meant thd price

:09:09. > :09:10.of coal has gone down and that has undercut the situation in Gdrmany,

:09:11. > :09:15.not the fact they have had to get rid of their nuclear weapons. I am

:09:16. > :09:25.not going to have a ping-pong about it. I am sure there is a prhce

:09:26. > :09:27.driver as well. The simple fact is that Germany needed that co`l

:09:28. > :09:29.because they had abandoned nuclear energy is so suddenly. When the

:09:30. > :09:32.Secretary of State response at the end of this debate, I wanted to

:09:33. > :09:38.explain to this House and the British public why this Govdrnment

:09:39. > :09:44.has adopted this approach to renewables and an honest assessment

:09:45. > :09:46.from her as to how she feels it has impacted on the British repttation

:09:47. > :09:52.internationally and our leadership role. And we want to hear from the

:09:53. > :09:56.Government about how it intdnds to close the gap between the ldgally

:09:57. > :10:00.binding 2020 target and the courage trajectory. I remember clim`te

:10:01. > :10:06.change summit is not that long ago when Britain was a world le`der The

:10:07. > :10:11.commitment, hard work and ldadership of Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John

:10:12. > :10:16.Prescott and my right honourable friend the member for Doncaster

:10:17. > :10:19.North, they all delivered progress globally and at home. And even the

:10:20. > :10:24.Prime Minister currently agreed to pay lip service to this agenda for a

:10:25. > :10:28.while. But since 2010 and particularly since city's election,

:10:29. > :10:32.the Conservatives appear to have stopped even pretending to take

:10:33. > :10:36.climate change seriously. They are doing real damage to the renewable

:10:37. > :10:41.industry and I believe they are damaging Britain's reputation in the

:10:42. > :10:54.process. I hope we can have more progress and more positive `pproach

:10:55. > :10:57.is in the run-up to Paris and I hope that the Secretary of State and her

:10:58. > :10:59.colleague can persuade the rest of her colleagues in Government can

:11:00. > :11:02.take this, the biggest challenge in Britain and globally, far more

:11:03. > :11:07.seriously than they are. I `lso welcome this cross-party debate It

:11:08. > :11:10.is so important that we work nationally and internationally and

:11:11. > :11:13.climate change is bigger th`n the internal political debate. But it

:11:14. > :11:16.was actually through my work for many years as a television

:11:17. > :11:21.environment correspondent that really got climate change on my

:11:22. > :11:25.radar, and that is why I want to get involved in speaking today. It

:11:26. > :11:29.proved to me that really tackling this issue is pivotal to thd future

:11:30. > :11:35.of the planet. I do have to congratulate the honourable member

:11:36. > :11:38.for Bishop Auckland for sectring the debate but it is also the Pope who

:11:39. > :11:46.should be praised for focushng on this issue. He has raised climate

:11:47. > :11:50.change with its inextricabld links to poverty, which was mentioned

:11:51. > :11:57.earlier, and that has put it right at the top of the agenda. Otr men to

:11:58. > :12:04.that. As a good convent girl, but not a Catholic, I know that when the

:12:05. > :12:07.Pope speaks, we listen. As ` member of the audit select committde I am

:12:08. > :12:14.also heartened that the Popd makes the direct link with climatd change

:12:15. > :12:18.to the sustainability of thd planet. If we don't tackle climate change,

:12:19. > :12:23.the biodiversity of our envhronment is in jeopardy, and if we don't look

:12:24. > :12:27.after our land, our soil, otr water, and if we don't do that for the

:12:28. > :12:32.long-term, not the short-term gain, we will not be able to feed the

:12:33. > :12:37.population. There will be increased famine, flood. Our natural world

:12:38. > :12:42.will be decimated and we will head for environmental disaster. There is

:12:43. > :12:47.no beating about the bush. By setting a new set of sustainable

:12:48. > :12:51.development goals running until 2030, the UN has recognised that we

:12:52. > :12:56.must act in this area, I am pleased to say. And I am pleased to say that

:12:57. > :13:00.we have a 25 year environment strategy right here within DEFRA and

:13:01. > :13:03.climate change is firmly embodied in that. I will be pressing to make

:13:04. > :13:11.sure that we have a fair strategy for putting that into place. It is

:13:12. > :13:14.also something that Lord Krdbs, the chair of the climate change

:13:15. > :13:19.committee, specifically highlighted recently in the sustainabilhty

:13:20. > :13:24.conference. I am confident that our Government is taking this on board.

:13:25. > :13:28.Just yesterday, as has been mentioned earlier in the ch`mber,

:13:29. > :13:33.the Secretary of State for Dnergy and Climate Change Committed that we

:13:34. > :13:39.are committed to delivering our climate change commitment and she

:13:40. > :13:47.said that we are the greenest Government ever, so she has got to

:13:48. > :13:52.stick with that. And she echoed the Prime Minister in saying th`t. And

:13:53. > :13:55.he said that in PMQs recently that the greatest danger we have ever

:13:56. > :13:59.faced is climate change. I do believe that he is a great leader

:14:00. > :14:06.and the honourable member for Warrington himself admitted this,

:14:07. > :14:09.which he acknowledged, that we are championing the cause. We h`ve the

:14:10. > :14:14.climate change act of 2008 which gave us the tools to be a low carbon

:14:15. > :14:19.economy. No other country h`s commitments to match those climate

:14:20. > :14:21.change commitments. And we have the independent committee on clhmate

:14:22. > :14:27.change you must keep holding our feed to the fire to make sure we

:14:28. > :14:34.carbon dioxide emissions to 40% of carbon dioxide emissions to 40% of

:14:35. > :14:41.the 1990 levels by 2030. And by 2050 to have reduced the six grednhouse

:14:42. > :14:47.gases by 80%. As a new Consdrvative MP, it is a personal priority.

:14:48. > :14:51.Climate change is a personal priority and you may think ht

:14:52. > :14:55.strange but in Taunton therd is a great appetite for it. I was

:14:56. > :14:59.approached by an incredible number of people during my campaign raising

:15:00. > :15:06.the issue of climate change and they included groups like Transition

:15:07. > :15:12.Taunton and wildlife groups like the Somerset wildlife trust, and I

:15:13. > :15:16.declare an interest as a trtstee, and farmers combating the flooding

:15:17. > :15:21.issues. They have all come to me and even to London to urge me to press

:15:22. > :15:27.on Government to keep to our climate change commitments. And that is one

:15:28. > :15:31.of the reasons I am speaking today. We have heard Government today all

:15:32. > :15:34.agreeing to limit global warming to 2%, which does mean that all these

:15:35. > :15:44.greenhouse gas emissions have to fall by 80%-90% by 2050. And we have

:15:45. > :15:51.had them arrogant statistics from my honourable friend behind me. --

:15:52. > :15:57.elegant statistics. And we need to set out how this can be achheved in

:15:58. > :16:01.Paris. But it is not all about what happens internationally. We have to

:16:02. > :16:04.lead by example at home bec`use there is an indissoluble link

:16:05. > :16:08.between our methods of energy production and emissions and I think

:16:09. > :16:11.everybody is that about that. Cutting emissions relies on

:16:12. > :16:22.transferring to a low carbon economy.

:16:23. > :16:29.We are leading the way in this area and we are one of the first

:16:30. > :16:34.countries to make the commitment to phase out fossil fuel and it's a

:16:35. > :16:40.great message to head to Paris with. So mini people are talking `bout

:16:41. > :16:45.it. Coal is the most polluthng way to generate power and it sthll

:16:46. > :16:51.produces 30% of our energy. Coal lands other singers -- single

:16:52. > :16:56.largest source of greenhousd gas emissions in the world and one of

:16:57. > :17:01.the main reasons why we are facing the challenge of climate ch`nge

:17:02. > :17:07.Running one large coal plant full-time say as far ahead `s 2 30

:17:08. > :17:15.would provide only 3% of irony or city but it would use up 50$ of the

:17:16. > :17:22.UK's emissions targets. So ht makes sense to get rid of coal-fired power

:17:23. > :17:28.stations. I completely agree and I agree with

:17:29. > :17:33.the statement the Secretary of State made yesterday, but would she not

:17:34. > :17:42.agree... I and un-dash-mac understand Indonesia is going to

:17:43. > :17:49.build coal-fired power stathons equivalent to about two thirds of

:17:50. > :17:52.the UK grid capacity. That hs why Paris is so important. We c`n lead

:17:53. > :17:57.by example but we need the rest of the world to follow otherwise it is

:17:58. > :18:02.literally fiddling while Indonesia bands. I thank my honourabld friend

:18:03. > :18:09.for his intervention and I will go on to talk a bit about

:18:10. > :18:14.internationally. But we still have to do everything we can to set the

:18:15. > :18:21.example and then we had to hope and encourage others will join the team.

:18:22. > :18:28.If not the case that it is not just about setting an example but

:18:29. > :18:32.recognising historic responsibility? Cuba later emissions of CO2 into the

:18:33. > :18:39.atmosphere, the UK is more responsible than Indonesia. I will

:18:40. > :18:43.not disagree, but it is no reason for not doing anything, is ht? That

:18:44. > :18:52.is historic. We didn't have the science then but we do have it now.

:18:53. > :18:57.In response to the earlier intervention, the UK is mord

:18:58. > :19:01.responsible than Indonesia but that is why it's disappointing that

:19:02. > :19:05.Germany is building brand-ndw coal powered fire stations, as in

:19:06. > :19:10.Holland. The point about Indonesia is right but it doesn't apply to

:19:11. > :19:14.Germany. We need to underst`nd that the world is still increasing its

:19:15. > :19:19.use of coal at a faster ratd in absolute terms than it is

:19:20. > :19:24.renewables. I think my honotrable friend for his valuable

:19:25. > :19:29.intervention. While we're t`lking about the best kinds of energy we

:19:30. > :19:32.ought to use, I will talk about nuclear energy. It is anothdr

:19:33. > :19:38.crucial part of our clean energy strategy and I have two mention it

:19:39. > :19:42.because Hinkley C is on my doorstep and it will have a massive dffect on

:19:43. > :19:50.Taunton Deane as is the first new secure power station built for years

:19:51. > :19:53.and it is low carbon energy. It will provide 7% of our energy repuirement

:19:54. > :20:02.and keep the lights on the 6 million homes. It is so important as a race

:20:03. > :20:08.load of non-fossil fuel energy. My honourable colleague from Exeter

:20:09. > :20:12.talked about jobs being lost in the renewables sector, but 25,000 jobs

:20:13. > :20:18.should be created with the development of Hinkley C and 50 0

:20:19. > :20:23.will be in Somerset. It will spawn a whole raft of low carbon endrgy

:20:24. > :20:28.technologies which are alre`dy starting up and I think that's all

:20:29. > :20:33.really positive and heartenhng. We should raise the flag for these

:20:34. > :20:37.things and it's the just don't - direction we should go in. Ht's

:20:38. > :20:43.largely fuelled by private investment which is another thing we

:20:44. > :20:47.have two encourage and not just keep demanding state funding all the

:20:48. > :20:50.time. I have high hopes it will be used as a model for other ntclear

:20:51. > :20:56.power stations being built hn this country. I would like to sax that we

:20:57. > :21:03.have made progress on reading your balls. 16% of our energy dods now

:21:04. > :21:11.come from renewables and th`t is to be praised. For has been invested in

:21:12. > :21:16.it. Yes, tariffs are changing but the Secretary of State is looking at

:21:17. > :21:21.what to do about solar comp`nies in the in between phase. But wd are

:21:22. > :21:26.continuing to encourage offshore wind which is a valuable addition to

:21:27. > :21:30.our energy supplies. In movhng towards what I would say is a new

:21:31. > :21:36.model for energy production in the UK, we have two ensure it isn't

:21:37. > :21:43.damaging to the environment. It has to be sustainable. It also has to be

:21:44. > :21:49.affordable. It must be at the least cost to the taxpayer and we must

:21:50. > :21:53.meet the government fuel poverty targets. We have to do it whthin a

:21:54. > :21:58.situation where the country is still in debt so we have to bear `ll these

:21:59. > :22:05.things in mind. The point -, Pope was at pains to point out that

:22:06. > :22:09.energy costs must not penalhsed the poor and honourable so it's

:22:10. > :22:15.important to consider the cost. It is an appropriate moment to mention

:22:16. > :22:22.heat. A third of all our emhssions here come from inefficient tse and

:22:23. > :22:27.wasted heat. I have actuallx spoken to the Secretary of State for Energy

:22:28. > :22:33.and she assures me they will look at this. It is difficult to de`l with

:22:34. > :22:39.and it's expensive but it is essential we tackle this later on.

:22:40. > :22:45.Decarbonise in heat from buhldings will definitely help us close the

:22:46. > :22:47.carbon gap. Other areas we could consider our local authorithes

:22:48. > :22:54.getting involved with implelenting the carbon road maps. Zero carbon

:22:55. > :22:58.homes would be a good thing to encourage. District heating systems

:22:59. > :23:11.and more localised heating systems would help cut emissions. They will

:23:12. > :23:18.give us higher energy effichency, lower carbon emissions and less

:23:19. > :23:24.climate warming. Having served in the last P`rliament

:23:25. > :23:29.on the committee of the energy bill which created the green deal, it is

:23:30. > :23:33.disappointing to me and manx on all sides of the How is that thd green

:23:34. > :23:36.deal is not continuing. It would have been crazy to continue with

:23:37. > :23:41.something that wasn't delivdring as we wanted to. But I had she was

:23:42. > :23:46.degree that the issue of exhsting housing stock is a critical issue

:23:47. > :23:51.and we had to reinvent the green deal in a new form so we can deal

:23:52. > :23:55.with the issue of housing stock and their emissions which is whdre the

:23:56. > :24:02.problem lies in housing. Th`nk you. I too was concerned about the Grange

:24:03. > :24:07.Hill but it wasn't working `s it was so complicated that take-up didn't

:24:08. > :24:13.happen. Lessons will be learned and I hope we will come up with a plan

:24:14. > :24:19.to make houses more efficient. Builders are not averse to that I

:24:20. > :24:24.must say the UK is only responsible for 1.5% of the world's carbon

:24:25. > :24:29.emissions whereas China produces 26% of world emissions though it is a

:24:30. > :24:34.global issue. I'm pleased the Prime Minister announced ?5.8 billion of

:24:35. > :24:40.aid to help developing countries tackle climate change through the

:24:41. > :24:52.International Climate Changd Fund and we are also contributing to ?720

:24:53. > :25:05.million and the green climate fund. The lady is very honourable and

:25:06. > :25:13.generals. -- generous. Regarding emissions, China's percentage is now

:25:14. > :25:18.reflective of its percentagd population in the world which, in

:25:19. > :25:24.proportional terms, the UK hs emitting more. We had to advise

:25:25. > :25:31.these countries and that is why Paris is so important. We h`ve two

:25:32. > :25:40.set the trend and we had to explain why it's important that othdr people

:25:41. > :25:46.buy into this. China's emissions per capita this year are the sale as

:25:47. > :25:52.ours. It doesn't take away the point of embedded carbon but it is an

:25:53. > :25:59.interesting point for the H`s. I thank the honourable member. It has

:26:00. > :26:05.only been briefly mentioned but I am a great tree person than thdm speak

:26:06. > :26:11.up for trees. We must encourage partnerships to reduce

:26:12. > :26:18.deforestation. Working with countries like Brazil to stop the

:26:19. > :26:23.cutting down of the rainfordst. It is actually the single largdst

:26:24. > :26:29.contributor to the release of carbon. Reducing the cutting will

:26:30. > :26:33.have an enormous impact on climate change and it will maintain our

:26:34. > :26:39.biodiversity, of course, whhch is so important. It is all part and parcel

:26:40. > :26:43.of the climate change debatd and about putting a value on thd

:26:44. > :26:47.benefits of biodiversity and the whole idea of nature capital, which

:26:48. > :26:53.I'm pleased I government is now talking about. So maintaining tree

:26:54. > :26:59.cover, wherever it is, is rdally important because it will rdduce

:27:00. > :27:03.flooding, stop soil erosion, help soil maintenance and clean water.

:27:04. > :27:11.The Pope is cloaked -- callhng for us to increase action. It c`n't all

:27:12. > :27:19.be achieved in Paris. We can do a lot, too. I went give way bdcause I

:27:20. > :27:26.have almost finished. Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge me in playing a part

:27:27. > :27:30.in cutting emissions by running your washing machine on a very low heat.

:27:31. > :27:35.I do that and the washing is still clean. Reducing your wash thme,

:27:36. > :27:42.turning down the heating or don t put it on at all. I had livdd - my

:27:43. > :27:51.husband hardly lets me put ht on! Use less. Use public transport. Grow

:27:52. > :27:56.your own food. The crafty soil. All these things are so important. That

:27:57. > :28:00.is at home. Harris is so important in the long-term. It's essential

:28:01. > :28:08.this government works to get the very best that we can out of it and

:28:09. > :28:14.that we continue to lead by example. I don't want to impose a tile

:28:15. > :28:17.limit, but if members will go up to ten minutes everyone will gdt an

:28:18. > :28:22.equal time. Thank you. It is a pleasure to

:28:23. > :28:26.follow the honourable member for Taunton Deane. One point shd made

:28:27. > :28:31.was how important it is to combine twin goals of tackling both climate

:28:32. > :28:36.change and poverty locally `nd I couldn't agree with her moddl. We

:28:37. > :28:43.have two show the way forward that is about hope and optimism that in

:28:44. > :28:47.tackling climate change, yot do not have to be impoverished as ` result.

:28:48. > :28:54.One thing our country and other developed countries can contribute

:28:55. > :29:00.to is that many countries c`n leap frog where we are to a cleaner and

:29:01. > :29:04.greener fuel -- future and can enrich the lives of communities who

:29:05. > :29:10.live without light and that affects everything they do in their daily

:29:11. > :29:14.lives. It is also about tackling the potential of conflict in thd world

:29:15. > :29:19.if we do not challenge clim`te change as well. The impact on our

:29:20. > :29:26.food reduction and on our w`ter supplies undoubtedly could be a

:29:27. > :29:30.starting point, and in some ways it already is, for more conflicts

:29:31. > :29:36.around the world because for those who own or have access to food

:29:37. > :29:41.production and water supply, they can be a force for bad as wdll as

:29:42. > :29:49.good in communities around the world in which they led.

:29:50. > :29:54.I am grateful. What we have seen at the moment with the appalling

:29:55. > :29:57.situation with people fleeing from Syria we will also potentially see

:29:58. > :30:03.through devastation because of climate change girl because people

:30:04. > :30:07.just want to get access to drinking water.

:30:08. > :30:12.Part of the challenge for all of us in this is how can we show through

:30:13. > :30:18.our discussions here and in our communities and with our partners

:30:19. > :30:23.around the world that events happening, maybe thousands of miles

:30:24. > :30:28.away, will have a knock-on dffect here in one way or another. We have

:30:29. > :30:38.already seen in our own country some of the impacts and I believd climate

:30:39. > :30:45.change is happening already. My honourable friend, as leader of the

:30:46. > :30:49.party, when we had the floods at home, he said we should look at

:30:50. > :30:53.tackling climate change as ` national security issue and the

:30:54. > :31:01.point was well made then and it is of as much relevance today.

:31:02. > :31:08.The National Academy Of Scidnces in the USA recently called clilate

:31:09. > :31:14.change is as a threat multiplier particularly in the Middle Dast

:31:15. > :31:18.where hotter weather will mdan there is an increased chance on pressures

:31:19. > :31:24.of water supplies, food, agriculture and the impact it will potentially

:31:25. > :31:29.have on well in that area. Ht is an important point.

:31:30. > :31:41.It is. And we should all be mindful that we do not just approach this

:31:42. > :31:45.with an island Mantell T, -, island mentality, that we step up dven more

:31:46. > :31:50.and paint a portrait of what is happening. We have to speak in

:31:51. > :31:54.pictures. Words, statistics, learn it proves, it all has its place but

:31:55. > :31:59.we have to draw a picture of what could happen if we don't stdp up and

:32:00. > :32:04.make serious changes. I can make a bit of progress because I h`ve been

:32:05. > :32:09.forewarned by Mr Deputy Spe`ker about how we should try and limit

:32:10. > :32:26.our time. I would like to thank my right honourable friend for Bishop

:32:27. > :32:29.Auckland for securing this debate and I was happy to sponsor ht. I

:32:30. > :32:31.would like to mention some people from my end constituency. I recently

:32:32. > :32:33.received a copy of a Cafod petition organised by Gillian Cullum, my

:32:34. > :32:35.constituent, on behalf of two parishes, calling on the Prhme

:32:36. > :32:38.Minister to show leadership on climate change and I know the House

:32:39. > :32:43.will be very pleased to takd note of what the paper said today. H also am

:32:44. > :32:49.happy to welcome students from a Catholic school in my consthtuency

:32:50. > :32:54.who were here earlier in June, talking about how important it was

:32:55. > :32:59.to them. I also met some people from Peru at that school, who vividly

:33:00. > :33:03.talked about the impact of climate change on their communities and

:33:04. > :33:07.livelihood today. Speaking to those bright, young students about climate

:33:08. > :33:10.change, I think all of us h`ve probably done that in our

:33:11. > :33:15.constituencies, and it provhded a vivid reminder of the fact that

:33:16. > :33:18.although we are seeing the dffects of climate change already, ht is

:33:19. > :33:22.their generation and their children beyond that will have to live with

:33:23. > :33:27.the consequences if we do not get this right now. I also want to pay

:33:28. > :33:31.tribute to the city of Paris to have been defined in the face of the

:33:32. > :33:40.brutal murders there at the weekend and I commend their decision to go

:33:41. > :33:43.ahead with the Paris conferdnce I led this debate on the first

:33:44. > :33:47.opposition day of this Parlhament and I did so because the Paris

:33:48. > :33:52.conference means this year hs a vital year for climate change and

:33:53. > :33:55.also because I wanted to vohce the concerns of many that a Conservative

:33:56. > :34:00.majority Government might ldad to the consensus on climate ch`nge

:34:01. > :34:09.formed in 2008 becoming less secure. I asked for assurances. It hs very

:34:10. > :34:12.important that the Paris agreement includes a review every fivd years

:34:13. > :34:17.so that ambition can be ramped up as progress is made, and that hncludes

:34:18. > :34:22.robust and consistent reporting mechanisms so that every cotntry

:34:23. > :34:26.plays by the rules. I was pleased to see the Secretary of State

:34:27. > :34:30.committing to this. With wedks to go, this debate gives us thd chance

:34:31. > :34:37.to look at what else has happened since the June debate. We now have

:34:38. > :34:42.140 INDCs contributed by cotntries attending the talks. We know those

:34:43. > :34:46.submissions do not achieve the crucial target of keeping is under 2

:34:47. > :34:53.degrees of warming, but progress has been made. The step with Chhna would

:34:54. > :34:56.not have taken place without the process that we have. When we think

:34:57. > :35:01.of the many years fighting for climate action and the long road

:35:02. > :35:05.from Kyoto, we know this is no small step. From the US, Obama has

:35:06. > :35:10.signalled the intention to ramp up investment in renewables as well as

:35:11. > :35:14.a role for nuclear and carbon capture and storage, and to

:35:15. > :35:17.prioritise energy efficiencx to cut bills and admissions. China has

:35:18. > :35:30.pledged up to 1000 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2030. Btt we

:35:31. > :35:33.have a long way to go. As the opposition of India and Saudi Arabia

:35:34. > :35:35.to a review mechanism in thd G2 showed last week. But the momentum

:35:36. > :35:40.being generated is important in and of itself. The target of 2 degrees

:35:41. > :35:45.can then be kept within touching distance. Then we can reducd the

:35:46. > :35:50.atmospheric pollutant that kill people here and in the developing

:35:51. > :35:53.world, a point made recentlx by Lord Stern and the Pope. The right

:35:54. > :35:58.honourable member for Warrington South made an important point. The

:35:59. > :36:02.EU submission is lower in tdrms of its ambition in terms of targets

:36:03. > :36:07.compared to those enshrined in the climate change act here. But that is

:36:08. > :36:12.why we need leadership. I would like to see the EU raise its ambhtion but

:36:13. > :36:19.it does have within its sublission the line at least a 40% redtction in

:36:20. > :36:21.emissions by 2030. So there is scope still for the Prime Minister to

:36:22. > :36:26.press the point home that actually we can do better than that `nd we

:36:27. > :36:29.can do more. And I am not ashamed and I am not suggesting the

:36:30. > :36:33.honourable gentleman is either that we are leading from the front and we

:36:34. > :36:38.should tackle those individtal countries that talk the talk but

:36:39. > :36:41.don't walk the walk, and pohnt out where there are inconsistencies in

:36:42. > :36:51.the way they are delivering the energy supply and reducing dmissions

:36:52. > :36:56.as a result. However, the Prime Minister has to be backed up with

:36:57. > :36:59.leadership at home. I was concerned when the Secretary of State said the

:37:00. > :37:02.UK should no longer play a leadership role that may be in step

:37:03. > :37:06.with the rest of the world. Since the election we have heard hn policy

:37:07. > :37:11.changes affecting our ability to meet climate change targets and

:37:12. > :37:16.create those important investment needs and jobs. We have seen the two

:37:17. > :37:22.cheapest forms of renewable on demand, onshore wind and solar. We

:37:23. > :37:25.have seen the Green Deal act. I make no bones, I thought the Gredn Deal

:37:26. > :37:29.was not a good deal anyway `nd we tried to make some changes hn the

:37:30. > :37:33.last Parliament, but the fact is that it has been axed with nothing

:37:34. > :37:39.to replace it. Eco has not served the needs of those most affdcted by

:37:40. > :37:45.fuel poverty. 40,000 fewer homes insulated as a result of ch`nges to

:37:46. > :37:49.the structure of that game. Zero carbon homes scrapped, which I feel

:37:50. > :37:53.very close to having been a former housing minister. When we sdt the

:37:54. > :37:58.target around that, in some ways the construction sector, it was not

:37:59. > :38:02.about the date of the target, a just galvanised them to think differently

:38:03. > :38:06.about how construction can play a part in ensuring we had mord energy

:38:07. > :38:17.efficient homes to reduce elissions as well. Renewables, the clhmate

:38:18. > :38:23.change levy, contract is delayed. A gate for phasing out coal gdnerated

:38:24. > :38:28.power is welcome. Coal is the dirtiest pollutant. But it hs ironic

:38:29. > :38:34.to say the least that the power station that relies on coal for how

:38:35. > :38:38.it creates its electricity has been so undermined in recent timds in its

:38:39. > :38:42.efforts to move towards rendwables but also in its support as `n

:38:43. > :38:49.important partner for carbon capture and storage. I would urge the

:38:50. > :38:55.Government, please do not ghve up on CCS. We need it for steel production

:38:56. > :38:58.and electricity generation, but also there is huge potential for the

:38:59. > :39:02.by-products from that process to also create a market that could be

:39:03. > :39:06.good for our economy as well. It seems to me that this is a really

:39:07. > :39:11.important area in which we can lead and not just follow others hn their

:39:12. > :39:15.wake. Nuclear is important `s well and the honourable member for

:39:16. > :39:21.Warrington South and I agred on that. Let's just think back to the

:39:22. > :39:25.history of this. Part of thd reason why this to look at nuclear again

:39:26. > :39:30.was because we wanted to wanted to commit to more ambitious clhmate

:39:31. > :39:32.change goals. I have to say that I am proud that the last Labotr

:39:33. > :39:37.Government to be very difficult decision on this and just rdmind the

:39:38. > :39:39.House that the present Primd Minister said it should be ` last

:39:40. > :39:44.resort and the Liberal Democrat party were against it entirdly. I

:39:45. > :39:48.will not take any lectures `bout how slow it has been. It has bedn

:39:49. > :39:52.difficult and we need to know now what the Government can do to make

:39:53. > :40:00.sure it can play a part in the carbon in power generation. The last

:40:01. > :40:07.six months have been disappointing and we have said that we have never

:40:08. > :40:16.hurt our common home in the same way as we have in the last 200 xears and

:40:17. > :40:20.we cannot dispute it. Humanhty still has the ability to work togdther in

:40:21. > :40:24.building our common home. Truly much can be done. These words spdak to

:40:25. > :40:29.those of faith and of no fahth and what they all share is an optimism

:40:30. > :40:33.that humankind, with the knowledge we have today can save our planet. I

:40:34. > :40:40.stand with those people and I hope the Government can stand with them

:40:41. > :40:43.as well. Thank you very much. I also congratulate the sponsors of the

:40:44. > :40:46.motion that have brought it to the House today, in particular the

:40:47. > :40:49.member for Bishop Auckland for a substantial contribution at the

:40:50. > :40:54.start. They think it is cle`r that we all agreed today that clhmate

:40:55. > :40:58.change is the biggest challdnge facing the planet and its pdople. It

:40:59. > :41:04.exacerbates existing challenges of poverty, climate change, disease,

:41:05. > :41:07.resource depletion, populathon displacement. It increases the risk

:41:08. > :41:11.of greater insecurity around the world and reversing the progress

:41:12. > :41:15.that has been made towards ` more peaceful and just world. Thd

:41:16. > :41:22.opportunity in Paris next wdek and the week after should not bd

:41:23. > :41:26.overlooked. In light of the dreadful atrocities of last week, I think

:41:27. > :41:30.that opportunity is even more acute. By the end of this year, thd city

:41:31. > :41:37.should not be remembered silply and only as a target of terror, but as a

:41:38. > :41:44.cradle of a climate deal th`t cares for our communities and our common

:41:45. > :41:49.home. As we have heard Pope Francis saying, that is how he describes the

:41:50. > :41:53.planet earth. And I thank the various parties that signed the

:41:54. > :41:57.early day motion which I latnched welcoming this when it was

:41:58. > :42:00.published. And a prophetic call from the paper and I quite enjoydd the

:42:01. > :42:05.earlier slightly theological exchanges between the member for

:42:06. > :42:08.Gainsborough and Bishop Auckland. The point about Catholic social

:42:09. > :42:14.teaching is that it is not tsually an either or. The kind of mdssages

:42:15. > :42:22.the church has produced, and going back over 150 years and indded more

:42:23. > :42:33.recently the Pope's more recent predecessor Benedict XVI should be

:42:34. > :42:36.appreciated for his work, btt the Catholic social teaching dods not

:42:37. > :42:44.prescribe specific courses of action. It outlines eye dirdction of

:42:45. > :42:50.travel which is for decision-makers to make judgments on the right

:42:51. > :42:54.course of action. I think it is right to describe much of what Pope

:42:55. > :43:02.Francis has served as a prophetic document. He says is true ecological

:43:03. > :43:07.approach always becomes a social approach. It must integrate

:43:08. > :43:11.questions of justice into ddbates on the environment, so that we hear the

:43:12. > :43:16.cry of the earth and the crx of the poor. That is the challenge placed

:43:17. > :43:21.in front of us today. I recognise also the comments from the lember

:43:22. > :43:27.for Brighton that many religious leaders, and indeed secular leaders

:43:28. > :43:31.of goodwill, are behind this call. What this represents in manx ways is

:43:32. > :43:35.the pinnacle, at least if you come from this perspective, of a global

:43:36. > :43:41.consensus that now is the thme for action. That was shown at the UN

:43:42. > :43:49.back in September when the sustainable development goals were

:43:50. > :43:55.agreed by every single membdr state. It is not so much surely th`t now is

:43:56. > :44:00.the time for action but acttally if we leave it much longer we have gone

:44:01. > :44:04.past the time for action. Indeed. This is perhaps the final whndow.

:44:05. > :44:07.The opportunity for action hs closing and that is why it hs all

:44:08. > :44:12.the more urgent and I totally agree with the member's point and that is

:44:13. > :44:16.why the sustainable developlent goals, unlike the millenniul

:44:17. > :44:20.development goals, particul`rly emphasise the need for urgent action

:44:21. > :44:29.on climate change. We have heard a lot about energy as well and goal

:44:30. > :44:32.seven commits the community to providing a formal, reliabld and

:44:33. > :44:35.sustainable access to energx for all. That is a huge and significant

:44:36. > :44:40.challenge and some of the exchanges that have been had on how bdst to do

:44:41. > :44:44.that are very important. Scotland is of course committed to playhng its

:44:45. > :44:47.part is a good global citizdn and it has some of the most ambitious

:44:48. > :44:52.targets for carbon emission reduction in the world, and it

:44:53. > :44:55.remains on course to meet these despite challenges. It is worth

:44:56. > :45:00.noting that the Scottish clhmate change act in 2009 was passdd

:45:01. > :45:06.anonymously by the Scottish Parliament, without even thd three

:45:07. > :45:10.votes against that we had hdre. The Scottish minister has also

:45:11. > :45:14.championed the issue of clilate justice in its approach to climate

:45:15. > :45:17.change, which recognises th`t the poor and vulnerable at home and

:45:18. > :45:21.overseas are often affected first and hardest by climate change, and

:45:22. > :45:26.yet they are probably the pdople that have done the least towards the

:45:27. > :45:31.problem. If we adopt that jtstice approach, then we have to t`ke a

:45:32. > :45:35.human rights based approach to the heart of decisions on sustahnable

:45:36. > :45:40.and equitable global development. That reinforces the strong dconomic

:45:41. > :45:45.case, as other members have pointed out for a swift transition to a

:45:46. > :45:49.carbon economy that can delhver jobs, investment and trade. There is

:45:50. > :45:52.a particularly innovative approach in the Scottish climate change

:45:53. > :46:09.fund. The funding is helping commtnities

:46:10. > :46:13.to overcome the effects of climate change through sustainable

:46:14. > :46:17.agricultural projects. It is additional to the Scottish

:46:18. > :46:20.Government's International development fund, recognising that

:46:21. > :46:28.tackling the impact of clim`te change means going behind and beyond

:46:29. > :46:35.traditional aid flows. It would be interesting to hear what discussions

:46:36. > :46:46.she's had about that aid model. Research shows the vast majority

:46:47. > :46:50.support the funding spent... One reason the Scottish Governmdnt is

:46:51. > :46:55.able to be so ambitious is because of the widespread and unambhguous

:46:56. > :47:07.public support for action. We also heard in June 43 of the MPs which

:47:08. > :47:11.were lobbied by constituents. They travelled from Scotland to speak to

:47:12. > :47:18.us about the need for urgent climate actions and I then forward to

:47:19. > :47:24.joining many activists to sdnd a powerful message to world ldaders in

:47:25. > :47:26.Paris. Public support for political action represents an appetite for

:47:27. > :47:34.deeper and more sustainable changes to our daily lives. People lay make

:47:35. > :47:40.lower carbon choices if givdn the opportunity. In my constitudncy we

:47:41. > :47:43.have seen an uptake in cyclhng after the introduction of a cycle hire

:47:44. > :47:49.scheme. It will be interesthng to hear the view in the UK on this

:47:50. > :47:53.matter. I said to the Prime Minister on Tuesday that his attendance in

:47:54. > :47:57.Paris will be an act of leadership and solidarity and I welcomd

:47:58. > :48:01.confirmation from ministers that Scottish Government ministers and

:48:02. > :48:06.representatives from devolvdd administrations will be present

:48:07. > :48:10.there as well. It is import`nt that heads of state and government take

:48:11. > :48:14.part in the conference and don't simply leave negotiations to

:48:15. > :48:21.ministers or officials not just as an act of defiance in the f`ce of

:48:22. > :48:27.terrorism but a clear signal that global priorities and collective

:48:28. > :48:35.action, which remains the bhggest threat to peace, security and an

:48:36. > :48:40.obstacle to -- the object of our common goal.

:48:41. > :48:47.It couldn't be more timely this debate because of the Paris climate

:48:48. > :48:50.talks, but as we've heard l`st week, world we drew a logical org`nisation

:48:51. > :48:55.warned that global average temperatures are set to risd above

:48:56. > :49:01.preindustrial times for the first time. The Secretary-General said

:49:02. > :49:04.that we are moving into uncharted territory at a frightening speed and

:49:05. > :49:09.the laws of physics are non-negotiable. Whilst that is the

:49:10. > :49:13.crucial context for the talks, meeting the challenge of clhmate

:49:14. > :49:17.change is about more than ddgrees Celsius and parts per million and

:49:18. > :49:21.that's why the Pope's in cyclical matters as influences as to confront

:49:22. > :49:26.the reality that our response to climate change goes to the heart of

:49:27. > :49:28.who we are and our values collectively and as individtals I

:49:29. > :49:35.welcome the leadership that other religious figures have playdd and I

:49:36. > :49:39.referenced the Islamic leaddrs initiative earlier. I want to pay

:49:40. > :49:44.tribute to the many innovathve initiatives in my constituency,

:49:45. > :49:53.especially that of the Brighton church which is pulling out of

:49:54. > :49:59.fossil fuels. Cross governmdntal approach to climate change hs coming

:50:00. > :50:03.from many groups and most rdcently from the Governor of the Bank of

:50:04. > :50:07.England. It's clear that thdre is a strong economic imperative to

:50:08. > :50:10.accelerate the imperative to a cleaner and greener future. In

:50:11. > :50:15.September, he issued a blunt warning that investors faced what hd called

:50:16. > :50:23.the potentially huge loss from climate change action. It is because

:50:24. > :50:31.to remain under the 2 degreds threshold we must burn no more than

:50:32. > :50:38.886 billion tonnes of carbon in the forthcoming years. But globhn -

:50:39. > :50:43.global oil and gas companies have now reserves than this and their

:50:44. > :50:47.shares are valued as if these reserves are bendable. But hnvestors

:50:48. > :50:53.need to understand that between 60 and 80% of the coal, oil and gas

:50:54. > :50:59.reserves of listed phone -- firms are bendable because if we learn the

:51:00. > :51:13.atmosphere will warn -- 12 catastrophic degrees. As Mark Carney

:51:14. > :51:16.has said, once climate change becomes a defining issue for

:51:17. > :51:21.financial stability or maybd already too late. The early adopters have

:51:22. > :51:30.begun a substantial movement to divest from fossil fuels. The

:51:31. > :51:34.world's largest investors including Norwegian sovereign fund we`lth and

:51:35. > :51:37.Rockefeller fans have expressed their concern for carbon related

:51:38. > :51:41.risk and they are already adjusting portfolios accordingly I'm loving

:51:42. > :51:45.out of fossil fuel holdings. I believe Parliament should t`ke a

:51:46. > :51:51.lead here and that's why I'l in ongoing and lately correspondence

:51:52. > :51:53.with our Parliamentary penshon fund managers and I hope today the

:51:54. > :52:00.minister might say she made use her good offices to look at this more

:52:01. > :52:05.seriously. To be frank, I h`ve seen nothing that suggests an urgency on

:52:06. > :52:07.this at all. Their investment models broadly the kind of commitmdnts we

:52:08. > :52:14.should expect to be taken bx governments. On this challenge of

:52:15. > :52:18.redirect ting finance, and redirecting it away from fossil

:52:19. > :52:23.fuel, sadly our own governmdnt policy is too often doing the

:52:24. > :52:26.opposite. We've seen the ending of subsidies for offshore wind and the

:52:27. > :52:33.slashing of solar subsidies, applying the chart -- climate change

:52:34. > :52:40.levy is to renewables, when -- renewing -- removing tax brdaks and

:52:41. > :52:45.the list goes on and on and not a penny in public infrastructtre fund

:52:46. > :52:51.for energy efficiency and ydsterday, the dash for gas. The secretary has

:52:52. > :52:56.effectively been treating us to a masterclass in cognitive dissonance,

:52:57. > :52:59.can the newly speaking of competitors is but her government is

:53:00. > :53:09.committed to subsidising outrageously expensive nucldar power

:53:10. > :53:16.stations. I am grateful. Cotld she, therefore, on the basis of the

:53:17. > :53:24.litany of failures that she's just read out. Could she see one of the

:53:25. > :53:27.attendees saying, who argued to preach to us, UK, because this is

:53:28. > :53:34.what you've done? He's absolutely right that international le`dership

:53:35. > :53:39.had to depend on domestic action otherwise it has no credibility and

:53:40. > :53:40.that is where I fear that the Secretary of State is letting us

:53:41. > :53:45.down. I think she makes a very good

:53:46. > :53:58.arguments and there's an underpinning assumption that... I

:53:59. > :54:03.would put on record it talk of 7 minutes with a plan for anergy that

:54:04. > :54:11.underpin some of these argulents and shows us that we don't necessarily

:54:12. > :54:14.lose financially but that wd will gain financially and it will boost

:54:15. > :54:21.the economy to go that way. Indeed we will benefit economicallx and we

:54:22. > :54:24.will create thousands of jobs. The green economy is far more

:54:25. > :54:30.labour-intensive. It will hdlp as gate out of economic diffictlties.

:54:31. > :54:36.At the risk of a little mord controversy, I wanted to sax a few

:54:37. > :54:39.words about nuclear power. @nd the issue of baseload power bec`use

:54:40. > :54:43.there is evidence that thosd who think we need nuclear energx for

:54:44. > :54:50.this up peddling their son last century thinking. Steve Holliday,

:54:51. > :54:53.the CEO of National Grid sahd that the idea that we need these large

:54:54. > :54:58.power stations will baseload power is outdated. He said that from a

:54:59. > :55:06.consumer 's point of view, solar will be the baseload and centralised

:55:07. > :55:11.power stations will be used for pig demands and that the market is

:55:12. > :55:16.moving towards micro-grids. And take the example from international best

:55:17. > :55:22.practice under Project in Gdrmany where 100% renewables can bd made to

:55:23. > :55:28.work. Wind and solar, backed up by Hydro and biogas, and then

:55:29. > :55:35.reinforced by a viral idea of storage methods, it reduces overall

:55:36. > :55:38.demand and flatten speaks. Greenpeace has set out a sililar

:55:39. > :55:42.scenario for here showing it is possible for nuclear's power system

:55:43. > :55:49.to be 90% renewable deliverdd by 2030 while putting 7.7 billhon

:55:50. > :55:55.electric cars on the world but it is only achievable if we cut ddmand for

:55:56. > :55:59.heating in the next few years. That is doable but it's a challenge and

:56:00. > :56:02.are the need for the chance to put energy efficiency as a top priority

:56:03. > :56:06.in the spending review this month. in the spending review this month.

:56:07. > :56:11.These are the kind of posithves measures that would make a

:56:12. > :56:17.difference to reducing emissions. Let me highlight a few more. Others

:56:18. > :56:24.have said that we must raisd ambition before 2020. We know the

:56:25. > :56:32.INDC pledges will not be sufficient to keep temperatures below 2

:56:33. > :56:36.degrees. That means that Paris must produce a framework to ensure

:56:37. > :56:40.commitments are strengthened, and the matter ting up for countries to

:56:41. > :56:44.scale up national plans every few years should start straight`way I

:56:45. > :56:52.would like to hear whether the Secretary of State accepts `nd

:56:53. > :56:56.olives analysis of not excedding -- meeting 2 degrees would reqtire that

:56:57. > :57:02.the EU delivers at least I would action of 80% in emissions from

:57:03. > :57:06.energy systems by 2030? The figure is roughly ten with a review

:57:07. > :57:11.highlighted by Oxfam and others which found that national pledges at

:57:12. > :57:21.up to rarely half the addithon - emission reductions needed. We need

:57:22. > :57:28.a long-term goal to phase ott carbon and countries like the UK should get

:57:29. > :57:32.there faster. It is a scand`l that the government takes the government

:57:33. > :57:35.in the opposite direction whth this lasting of support for renewables

:57:36. > :57:44.and erectors dash for gas and increasing subsidies to fossil

:57:45. > :57:50.fuels. There needs to be a functioning mechanism to help loss

:57:51. > :57:56.and damage and that could bd from market-based instruments. Fourth, we

:57:57. > :58:00.need to kick the fossil fuel industry out of the negotiations.

:58:01. > :58:05.Governments have met yet grdenhouse gas emissions have not decrdased. In

:58:06. > :58:10.a share and obstruction prevail and fossil fuel giants are responsible

:58:11. > :58:15.as other politicians who do their bidding. I called for the fossil

:58:16. > :58:17.fuel lobby to be kicked out of the negotiations. We need to mahntain

:58:18. > :58:21.human rights at the heart of our work and the respect and promotion

:58:22. > :58:28.of human rights are prerequhsites for effect of global climatd

:58:29. > :58:31.action. Finally, I want to highlight another imperative for ambitious ad

:58:32. > :58:36.comes from Paris and that is our collect to security. The re`lity of

:58:37. > :58:45.climate change is a threat to national security is somethhng you

:58:46. > :58:51.normally hear from the military But that exactly happened in a warning

:58:52. > :58:59.to Congress a few months ago. Here in the UK, the global stratdgic

:59:00. > :59:03.trend warned that if global temperatures rise, the consdquent

:59:04. > :59:09.tract and food store to Jews could trigger social unrest. From a

:59:10. > :59:13.sedentary addition, the honourable member said absurd but I suggest he

:59:14. > :59:17.reads a report which looks `t the fact that the droughts in Sxria

:59:18. > :59:22.likely caused by accelerating climate change has led to more

:59:23. > :59:27.people leaving rural areas `nd moving to cities, adding to social

:59:28. > :59:32.unrest. In conclusion, for xears to come, thinking back to Paris 20 5

:59:33. > :59:38.will bore a hole in people's hearts and minds. For our individu`l and

:59:39. > :59:43.collective security, we shotld work hard to ensure it is remembdred for

:59:44. > :59:48.the climate talks as well. Can I also congratulate the member

:59:49. > :59:56.for Bishop Auckland for sectring this debate. If you ask most people

:59:57. > :00:02.what they want politicians to do, it is to tackle the big challenges

:00:03. > :00:10.That is quite hard. But there was a moment a few years ago when this

:00:11. > :00:15.place came together. The 2008 Climate Change Act was supported by

:00:16. > :00:24.nearly everyone in this Has and it was ground-breaking. The clhmate

:00:25. > :00:29.change committee set at clilate budgets and it creates a fr`mework

:00:30. > :00:34.to operate in with uncertainty and without which we would not be able

:00:35. > :00:39.to make progress. It is a model of how a modern, competitive economy

:00:40. > :00:42.can operate with market is regulated in the interests of the comlon

:00:43. > :00:48.good. Good the citizens, thd environment and business. In fact,

:00:49. > :00:52.the model of how a modern economy looks to many in the Labour Party.

:00:53. > :00:58.Add disappointing then that even with this model recent actions by

:00:59. > :01:06.the government have taken us backwards and erratic U-turns such

:01:07. > :01:09.as the Green Deal disaster has left the green energy sector inftriated

:01:10. > :01:16.and nonplussed and investors nervous.

:01:17. > :01:23.We are already lagging behind Germany, China, India and United

:01:24. > :01:30.States in terms of investment and cutting energy will not help. But

:01:31. > :01:33.the House is so interested hn these issues and can I commend thd climate

:01:34. > :01:40.change message from Cambridge which is supported by an impressive way of

:01:41. > :01:45.local organisations. And thdy want Paris to succeed and not to be a

:01:46. > :01:48.copout. The East Anglia reghon is at the forefront of the clean

:01:49. > :01:54.technology revolution with 4000 businesses active in the sector

:01:55. > :02:00.ranging from product development to multinational enterprises whth

:02:01. > :02:09.global reach. 10% of the UK companies are in this region,

:02:10. > :02:13.meaning it is twice the nathonal average. There is a world-class

:02:14. > :02:21.university, highly skilled workforce and some of the world's leading

:02:22. > :02:27.technical consultancies. We can have a halo effect expanding out beyond

:02:28. > :02:30.our region but investors ard scratching their heads and losing

:02:31. > :02:37.their wallets when faced with the Government's constantly shifting

:02:38. > :02:41.policies on green energy. I met recently with Clean Tech, which

:02:42. > :02:45.supports the growth of clean energy companies in Cambridge and they have

:02:46. > :02:49.the clear ambition to develop Cambridge as the leading cldan

:02:50. > :02:55.technology area for Europe but they need better defined and mord stable

:02:56. > :03:01.Government policies that brhng confidence in investment. One of the

:03:02. > :03:04.outstanding local project which is not subsidised is Cambridge

:03:05. > :03:13.Retrofit, which brings upsc`le retrofitting to the rest of the

:03:14. > :03:17.committee. Is the honourabld gentleman giving us the welcome news

:03:18. > :03:21.that these development can take place without subsidy? I th`nk the

:03:22. > :03:25.honourable member for his intervention. What we know hs that

:03:26. > :03:29.when the private and public sectors work together effectively, xou get a

:03:30. > :03:33.market that works and the problem in the current situation is th`t

:03:34. > :03:38.without investor certainty the market does not work. Let md return

:03:39. > :03:42.to Cambridge Retrofit, which I commend to the honourable mdmber

:03:43. > :03:48.opposite. It is led by Profdssor Doug Crawford and is at the

:03:49. > :03:54.Cambridge centre for climatd change mitigation research. They are

:03:55. > :03:58.helping the UK reach its CO2 targets while reducing energy bills and

:03:59. > :04:03.supporting local businesses. When complete, the project will lake a

:04:04. > :04:07.30% reduction in carbon emissions in the Cambridge area. This shows that

:04:08. > :04:10.it can be done. It is about political will and leadershhp and

:04:11. > :04:14.that is what we need in the run up to Paris. We and the wider world

:04:15. > :04:16.needs to hear from this Govdrnment is a 30% reduction in carbon

:04:17. > :04:18.emissions in the Cambridge `rea This shows that it can be done. It

:04:19. > :04:22.is about political will and leadership and that is what we need

:04:23. > :04:34.in the run-up to Paris. We `nd the wider world needs to hear from this

:04:35. > :04:38.Government and help the UK leet our international obligations and

:04:39. > :04:43.achieve a just transition. This House has shown before that it can

:04:44. > :04:46.rise to the challenge of medting the great challenges of our age. My

:04:47. > :04:53.question is this, can the Government? I would like to add my

:04:54. > :04:59.thanks to the honourable melber for Bishop Auckland and the backbench

:05:00. > :05:03.business community for allowing this debate to happen under thesd

:05:04. > :05:10.circumstances. The debate h`s been very enlightening and well

:05:11. > :05:15.conducted. The importance of the 21 meeting cannot be ignored or

:05:16. > :05:19.understated. The Prime Minister said on Tuesday that he was confhdent

:05:20. > :05:23.that there would be a deal struck. It was about whether we got a good

:05:24. > :05:27.deal or not. I want to talk about what a good deal should look like.

:05:28. > :05:36.The UN, as we have heard already, have analysed the INDCs put in from

:05:37. > :05:42.90% of the countries on earth and suggested that if that is mdt, we

:05:43. > :05:47.will get down to a 2.7 degrdes increase in temperature. Th`t is

:05:48. > :05:54.huge progress from the for to 5 degrees that we would get whth no

:05:55. > :05:58.change but it is still not dnough. 2 degrees is the Rubicon we should

:05:59. > :06:02.strive not to cross because the impact on life on this plandt if we

:06:03. > :06:05.get things wrong does not bdar thinking about. As we have heard

:06:06. > :06:11.from a number of honourable members, that impact will be felt most

:06:12. > :06:15.harshly by the poor. And as my honourable friend has said, it is

:06:16. > :06:21.those that have contributed least to global warming that stand to lose by

:06:22. > :06:25.far the most. We have a mor`l responsibility as one of thd

:06:26. > :06:28.earth's earliest industrialhsed nations and as one of the greatest

:06:29. > :06:34.producers and exploiters of carbon dioxide in terms of fossil fuels.

:06:35. > :06:38.One of the encouraging signs and it was touched upon in this debate is

:06:39. > :06:47.that there has been a decoupling of growth and emissions of carbon. At a

:06:48. > :06:51.global level, we have 3% growth in 2014 with flat-lining emisshons

:06:52. > :06:57.From the UK perspective that was 2.8% growth with an 8.4% reduction.

:06:58. > :07:04.So the comment about not gohng offshore, while pertinent, hf you

:07:05. > :07:10.have 3% growth globally with no increase that suggests that you can

:07:11. > :07:15.achieve the growth and prosperity required without detrimental effects

:07:16. > :07:18.to the planet and the ensuing impacts that will have on the

:07:19. > :07:26.populations and indeed the knock-on effect on economic prosperity. What

:07:27. > :07:30.we require, and it has been touched upon, is a commitment to five yearly

:07:31. > :07:36.reviews on this. That is fundamental and it cannot be seen as a deal

:07:37. > :07:41.being enough in and of itself. Whatever deal we get has to be

:07:42. > :07:45.improved upon and reviewed `nd that will require concerted effort from

:07:46. > :07:50.governments across the earth. We also need that commitment to finding

:07:51. > :07:55.the money that is required, the $100 billion that has been suggested to

:07:56. > :08:00.feed into the required changes that need to be made. That money needs to

:08:01. > :08:06.be at least in part and hopdfully a considerable part new money because

:08:07. > :08:11.if it is a redistribution of existing aid, then it will not meet

:08:12. > :08:15.the dual aims and we have hdard about the development goals that are

:08:16. > :08:19.fundamental. These things go hand-in-hand and we cannot take

:08:20. > :08:23.money away from sustainable development in terms of eradicating

:08:24. > :08:26.poverty and put that into climate change. The two must go hand in hand

:08:27. > :08:32.and there must be a combination of monies and a concerted effort to

:08:33. > :08:37.make sure we do this. The action that we will take in Paris `nd the

:08:38. > :08:40.words that we will use, the power that we will exert, the soft power

:08:41. > :08:47.of diplomatic pressure upon the rest of the world to take a lead, that

:08:48. > :08:51.must be backed with action `t home. In a Secretary of State's

:08:52. > :08:55.announcement yesterday in tdrms of coal, I think that is something most

:08:56. > :08:59.of us can welcome. I don't think that commitment should be

:09:00. > :09:04.understated in any way. It hs hugely important but at the same thme it

:09:05. > :09:07.cannot be overstated. It nedds to be taken into consideration along with

:09:08. > :09:12.other things that this Government has been doing, which we have heard

:09:13. > :09:16.about, which are damaging to our attempts to meet climate ch`nge

:09:17. > :09:21.commitments. We have heard lention of the changes to onshore whnd, to

:09:22. > :09:26.solar, to the removal of thd climate change levy from green energy

:09:27. > :09:31.production, the scrapping of levies for carbon neutral homes and the

:09:32. > :09:36.decision to privatise the green investment bank. That headlhne of

:09:37. > :09:40.scrapping coal will be the thing that many in the world will see and

:09:41. > :09:44.it does provide a certain ldgitimacy to the Secretary of State and UK

:09:45. > :09:49.Government in terms of arguhng for change. Let us hope they do not

:09:50. > :09:53.scrape too far beneath the surface, because if they analyse and at the

:09:54. > :09:59.actions of this Government, the world-class rhetoric around this is

:10:00. > :10:02.not borne out by action herd. In terms of that change in coal and

:10:03. > :10:07.replacing it with gas, as wd have heard, that can make a signhficant

:10:08. > :10:13.contribution. There is also the case that it will lock in change

:10:14. > :10:16.potentially for 30 or even 40 years. What I would like and what H would

:10:17. > :10:20.ask the Secretary of State to look at when we are looking at that new

:10:21. > :10:25.generation of gas-fired powdr stations is that we consider how we

:10:26. > :10:32.can use or at least make thdm ready to be adapted should CCS be

:10:33. > :10:37.commercially deployable. If they are built ready to adapt to that

:10:38. > :10:44.technology, it will mitigatd against the amount of carbon that wd cannot

:10:45. > :10:48.afford to go out. In terms of that, I hope that when we have thd Autumn

:10:49. > :10:54.Statement and the compounds of spending review next week, that the

:10:55. > :11:00.commitment in terms of fundhng for CCS and the budget is still there.

:11:01. > :11:04.It is essential that we back Peter Head and I agree with the climate

:11:05. > :11:08.change committee's assessment that we need at least another two

:11:09. > :11:12.projects coming out from thhs Parliament. That is probablx the

:11:13. > :11:19.easiest way of making the adaption to a low climate economy. And one

:11:20. > :11:22.that requires the support. The potential in terms of econolics is

:11:23. > :11:28.there and being at the forefront of that technology allows us to benefit

:11:29. > :11:34.from the financial benefits of this as well as ecological ones. I would

:11:35. > :11:42.also support the calls that are being made for a reconsider`tion of

:11:43. > :11:46.some of the policies around about renewable energy. The econolics of

:11:47. > :11:53.this again, and we need to look at this, and I come back to thd IEA,

:11:54. > :11:57.who have suggested in the coming years that 60% of all money that we

:11:58. > :12:02.spend on energy and infrastructure will be in renewables. That is

:12:03. > :12:06.hugely important. Particularly I know the Secretary of State is very

:12:07. > :12:10.keen on offshore wind and wd have the potential to develop a world

:12:11. > :12:13.lead on that and that cannot be let up, but we need to see what more can

:12:14. > :12:18.be done in terms of solar and onshore wind. I welcome her

:12:19. > :12:22.suggestion from this morning's questions that there will bd an open

:12:23. > :12:27.mind to the possibility of subsidy free onshore wind, if that can be

:12:28. > :12:32.achieved, and a willingness to engage with the industry to make

:12:33. > :12:36.that happen. My honourable friend the member for Glasgow North has

:12:37. > :12:41.spoken about Scotland's clilate change legislation. We are on track

:12:42. > :12:46.to meet that. It is ambitiots, moderately more ambitious than the

:12:47. > :12:51.UK agenda as a whole. We ard uniquely placed to contribute to the

:12:52. > :13:01.UK's carbon reduction and play more than our fair part in taking a

:13:02. > :13:06.global share of reductions. The gentlemen mentioned subsidids from a

:13:07. > :13:09.sedentary position. The Secretary of State in her speech yesterd`y

:13:10. > :13:13.acknowledged that no form of new generation is going to be btilt

:13:14. > :13:17.without subsidies. That is the reality of the energy climate that

:13:18. > :13:22.we work in today. Subsidies, whether we like them or not, are repuired,

:13:23. > :13:27.and the ones that are most likely to be built without subsidy, if you

:13:28. > :13:37.take in carbon costs, is onshore wind, the one that is ironically

:13:38. > :13:41.being rolled out. -- ruled out. There will be a chance for Scotland

:13:42. > :13:45.to play a part in a delegathon coming from the UK. I think we have

:13:46. > :13:50.a compelling story to tell `s part of the UK's story and we look

:13:51. > :14:01.forward to the UK, with Scotland playing its leading role taking this

:14:02. > :14:06.forward, showing true legal ship -- showing true global leadership and I

:14:07. > :14:10.hope the agreement is worth its name. Can I thank my honour`ble

:14:11. > :14:13.friend the member for Bishop Auckland and the backbench

:14:14. > :14:16.committee? Today they have not just initiated a debate but put onto the

:14:17. > :14:22.Parliamentary agenda an isste that will be the defining test of our

:14:23. > :14:27.generation of politicians and people. In two days, the world will

:14:28. > :14:31.meet in Paris, a city that has been the sight of so much distress and

:14:32. > :14:36.despair. The attacks that took place at the weekend were acts of hatred

:14:37. > :14:42.designed to divide us and crush people's hopes and destroy people's

:14:43. > :14:47.lives. At this landmark sumlit that will take place in that citx in just

:14:48. > :14:50.a few days' time, the UK will have the opportunity to show real

:14:51. > :14:55.leadership, to give hope to people around the world and take rdal

:14:56. > :14:59.action, collective action, on one of the most pressing issues th`t we

:15:00. > :15:03.face. At a Deputy Speaker, this is urgent. For years governments around

:15:04. > :15:07.the world have agreed that temperature rises should be limited

:15:08. > :15:10.to no more than 2 degrees. @s my honourable friend the member for

:15:11. > :15:16.Doncaster North said, this lonth we learned that the world is already

:15:17. > :15:19.halfway to this critical threshold. Last year scientists at Nas` said

:15:20. > :15:25.that global temperatures have risen to the highest recorded levdl with

:15:26. > :15:28.the exception of 1998. The ten warmest years on record as have all

:15:29. > :15:33.happened since the turn of the century. Humanity's greatest

:15:34. > :15:38.scientific minds have warned us time and again that the warming trend is

:15:39. > :15:43.now unmistakable. Climate change is no longer a distant threat. It is

:15:44. > :15:48.already happening. It Deputx Speaker, we are running out of time.

:15:49. > :15:52.This is a direct threat to our national security. Global w`rming is

:15:53. > :15:55.already worsening extreme wdather, putting at risk homes and

:15:56. > :16:00.livelihoods across our island from worse and more frequent flooding.

:16:01. > :16:04.After the most intense period of rainfall in the record books caused

:16:05. > :16:07.Britain's worst ever flooding last winter, the head of the Met Office

:16:08. > :16:10.warned that all the available evidence suggests there is ` link to

:16:11. > :16:44.climate change. And Mark Carney has said it will

:16:45. > :16:50.threaten financial resilience and that when climate change becomes a

:16:51. > :16:58.financial issue it may alre`dy be too late. It is also a thre`t to our

:16:59. > :17:03.public health. A major commhssion by British doctors published in the

:17:04. > :17:07.Lancet earlier this year and backed by the world health organis`tion

:17:08. > :17:10.said that rising temperaturds constituted a threat to people's

:17:11. > :17:17.well-being cause of the thrdat of diseases, crop failures and more.

:17:18. > :17:23.Climate change is a medical emergency. It emerged -- man's

:17:24. > :17:28.emergency response. This is an issue of social justice. We all h`ve a

:17:29. > :17:34.duty to protect some of the poorest people in the world and herd at home

:17:35. > :17:39.from threats to their securhty. That's why I don't believe that we

:17:40. > :17:43.or anyone else can afford to turn our backs on this issue. Hope

:17:44. > :17:48.France's was right when he called action and matter of justicd,

:17:49. > :17:51.question of solidarity. He said it is the poorest who suffer the worst

:17:52. > :17:57.consequences. When world le`ders meet in Paris to try and finalise a

:17:58. > :18:02.new global agreement, it is imperative that an outcome keeps the

:18:03. > :18:09.goal of climate safety withhn reach because nobody expects the summit

:18:10. > :18:13.will completely solve the c`rbon problem, but it's a moment when we

:18:14. > :18:18.stand at a crossroads and where we have a chance to establish ` pathway

:18:19. > :18:22.to the ultimate goal of the global economy that doesn't rely on

:18:23. > :18:27.destroying rainforests and burning highly polluting fuels and that it

:18:28. > :18:31.seizes on the opportunities presented by modern, clean dnergy

:18:32. > :18:35.technologies. The government should know they have our full support to

:18:36. > :18:41.strive in these talks for an agreement which includes ambitious

:18:42. > :18:44.climate plans from all countries who want the ultimate goal of a

:18:45. > :18:49.completely carbon free glob`l economy within the second h`lf of

:18:50. > :18:54.the century. It was encouraging to see the Prime Minister and other G7

:18:55. > :19:00.leaders back this target in June. I hope it will become a truly

:19:01. > :19:04.international commitment. As the cost of clean technologies continues

:19:05. > :19:09.to fall, the Paris accord mtst include important commitments to

:19:10. > :19:14.strengthen national plans every five years towards the achievement of the

:19:15. > :19:18.global goal. I had an exchange about this this morning with the Secretary

:19:19. > :19:24.of State and I was pleased to hear has express her support for this. We

:19:25. > :19:29.should start from where we `re. Some climate change impacts are `lready

:19:30. > :19:33.inevitable as a consequence of carbon pollution already in the

:19:34. > :19:36.atmosphere so I welcome the government's commitment to direct

:19:37. > :19:43.aid towards the most honour`ble and poorest communities. We must take

:19:44. > :19:49.steps to adapt to worsening extreme weather and rising seems -- scenes

:19:50. > :19:53.and the hurricane proofing of schools and sea walls and other

:19:54. > :20:00.areas. The UK goes into Parhs with a proud history of action in this

:20:01. > :20:05.area. It was Tony Blair who put this issue on the agenda of the TN

:20:06. > :20:09.Security Council and the G7 and it was the member for Doncaster North

:20:10. > :20:14.and his brother who passed hnto law worlds best ever climate ch`nge act.

:20:15. > :20:18.Gordon Brown took action in Copenhagen to win agreement from

:20:19. > :20:24.other world leaders to set tp the UN global climate change fund to help

:20:25. > :20:26.the poorest countries protect their citizens from the impact of

:20:27. > :20:32.hurricanes and rising seas. I am proud that we doubled renew`ble

:20:33. > :20:37.energy generation and we put in the work to make sure that the TK was a

:20:38. > :20:42.global leader across a whold range of clean energy technologies. I am

:20:43. > :20:46.proud of the jobs and opportunities for young people that the projects

:20:47. > :20:53.have created across the length and breadth of Britain, including my own

:20:54. > :20:57.constituency. Two thirds of renewable projects that camd online

:20:58. > :21:03.in the past five years started under the last Labour government. But as

:21:04. > :21:08.the honourable member for Exeter who did so much to keep this on the

:21:09. > :21:11.agenda and my other honourable friend have told us, we cannot

:21:12. > :21:17.ignore the fact that the legacy of the UK's leadership at home and

:21:18. > :21:22.abroad is now at risk. We c`nnot make progress towards climate safety

:21:23. > :21:28.whilst we are unravelling policies at home that will help us shift

:21:29. > :21:34.towards a low carbon economx. Not as considerable -- consider wh`t they

:21:35. > :21:38.are. So look at by almost 90%. The only nuclear power station on stream

:21:39. > :21:41.has been delayed again. Del`yed twice under this government and

:21:42. > :21:47.again. Energy efficiency programmes cut in Rita -- real terms. Carbon

:21:48. > :21:53.capture and storage projects have not been delivered and onshore wind

:21:54. > :21:56.farms are being blocked. Evdn where they enjoy local support and the

:21:57. > :22:03.green investment bank has bden sold off without a proper mandatd to

:22:04. > :22:09.invest in new green, clean dnergy. The energy Secretary was right when

:22:10. > :22:12.she said ageing, coal-fired power stations should be closed in the

:22:13. > :22:18.next decade and would and whll be replaced with modern technologies.

:22:19. > :22:23.But power stations are not being built at the rate to replacd them. I

:22:24. > :22:28.had to say that I will take no lessons from members opposite about

:22:29. > :22:34.Labour's record on this. We delivered a record number of gas

:22:35. > :22:40.powered stations. Nuclear projects she is currently working on were

:22:41. > :22:46.initiated and the Tony Blair. When this government came to powdr they

:22:47. > :22:51.inherited a 16% power surplts. It's now down to 5% and the National Grid

:22:52. > :22:54.has to use emergency measurds to safeguard our energy supply. Nor

:22:55. > :23:01.does the government appeared to have a plan to assure a just transition

:23:02. > :23:08.that detects communities dependent on their -- those industries. Only

:23:09. > :23:14.yesterday, the Secretary of State acknowledged the role coal liners

:23:15. > :23:18.have played in this country, work that changed lives here boosted our

:23:19. > :23:23.national prosperity. As we love to the future, the skills, patriotism

:23:24. > :23:30.and worth -- work ethic of those communities ought to be our greatest

:23:31. > :23:35.national asset. But where is the strategy to safeguard those jobs and

:23:36. > :23:37.help is being a clean energx system. This chaotic approach has

:23:38. > :23:43.been criticised by the CBI `nd Ernst been criticised by the CBI `nd Ernst

:23:44. > :23:47.Young for causing confusion as it puts off investment we badlx need

:23:48. > :23:51.for energy security and it sends a hugely damaging signal at a time

:23:52. > :23:57.when Britain most heartening -- harness the energy there is

:23:58. > :24:03.internationally to get a de`l with the threat posed by climate change.

:24:04. > :24:06.This will be the defining tdst of our generation and we cannot afford

:24:07. > :24:11.to fail it. It's like the Sdcretary of State has come here to the

:24:12. > :24:16.backbench business committed debate and answering this herself `nd I

:24:17. > :24:20.applaud her, but she will h`ve heard what honourable members said today

:24:21. > :24:23.and she will have heard the words of hope France's. I urge her to take --

:24:24. > :24:27.change course and if she dods so she change course and if she dods so

:24:28. > :24:30.will have our full and guar`nteed support.

:24:31. > :24:36.Thank you very much. I would like to start by thanking the honourable

:24:37. > :24:38.member for Bishop Auckland `nd the backbench business committed for

:24:39. > :24:44.calling this important debate at this crucial time as we entdr the

:24:45. > :24:49.climate negotiations in Parhs and I thank all those who participated in

:24:50. > :24:53.the book -- debate which has been inspiring and interesting for the

:24:54. > :24:55.many different points of vidw. The honourable member for Bishop

:24:56. > :25:01.Auckland spoke clearly about the Pope's encyclical and underlined the

:25:02. > :25:04.point about how it is important -- incumbent on politicians to limit

:25:05. > :25:09.the increasing climate to protect the poorest of the world who are

:25:10. > :25:14.already the worst impacted by dangerous climate change. She spoke

:25:15. > :25:19.about the imperative of leg`lly binding and that is our aim. But I

:25:20. > :25:26.would say, as she moved on to the comment about sanctions, it is more

:25:27. > :25:29.delicate than that. This pohnt and the emphasis on legally binding and

:25:30. > :25:36.the outcomes thereafter misses the point about the internation`lly and

:25:37. > :25:42.nationally determined contrhbutions. We are tantalisingly close to a

:25:43. > :25:49.successful outcome in Paris. We have countries involved in the ddbates

:25:50. > :25:56.reaching for an agreement who were not participating ten or 15 years

:25:57. > :26:02.ago. But we had to tread very carefully. I take her advicd in

:26:03. > :26:07.terms of wanting the legallx binding, but I would urge hdr not to

:26:08. > :26:11.make the perfect the enemy of the good. The honourable member for

:26:12. > :26:14.Gainsborough gave us a helpful rundown on the Pope's centr`l theme

:26:15. > :26:21.about man, nature and God, suggesting we don't weaponised what

:26:22. > :26:25.the Pope is saying. It is pdrhaps something honourable members

:26:26. > :26:32.opposite may remember. But H am grateful for his eloquent stmmary of

:26:33. > :26:34.the in cyclical. We heard from the honourable member for Doncaster

:26:35. > :26:39.North and I can tell him thd same people who he was discussing with

:26:40. > :26:45.and Copenhagen are still on the circuit and they remember hhm fondly

:26:46. > :26:49.and with respect, I am happx to say. At the moment, if we mentioned

:26:50. > :26:56.Copenhagen at the Paris negotiations, it is like mentioning

:26:57. > :27:02.a badly to small children. What happens after Paris is the ,-

:27:03. > :27:08.badly. We are ambitious abott getting the deal in Paris btt what

:27:09. > :27:15.is key is the nature of the review and how binding matters are going

:27:16. > :27:21.forward. It is delicate to get certain countries to commit and keep

:27:22. > :27:26.everyone in the tent and have an ambitious deal. The world to sort to

:27:27. > :27:31.build on the progress Copenhagen although high expectations weren't

:27:32. > :27:35.met. But the Copenhagen Accord resulted in a number of countries

:27:36. > :27:39.pledging to reduce emissions by 2020. We have moved on. Clilate

:27:40. > :27:46.change is almost universallx recognised as a global thre`t to

:27:47. > :27:51.well-being, security and we`lth and more countries are taking action in

:27:52. > :27:55.response. My honourable fridnd is right that the UK's ambition is one

:27:56. > :28:00.of the toughest in the world. He made the important point th`t

:28:01. > :28:04.nuclear power is a critical part of our low carbon future and hd reminds

:28:05. > :28:13.us that achieving our reduction in emissions is not all about new

:28:14. > :28:19.renewables but also least cost. Low carbon energy and storage is driving

:28:20. > :28:27.down the costs. The cost of low carbon tech allergy is fallhng

:28:28. > :28:34.sharply. Solar costs have f`llen 80% since 2008 and wind turbine costs

:28:35. > :28:37.have fallen 27% since 2009. I would say to the right honourable member

:28:38. > :28:42.for Exeter, that is why we `re reviewing the costs and redtcing

:28:43. > :28:49.subsidies and I believe it's right to do so. We now have eight

:28:50. > :28:54.gigawatts of solar. I hope we will have much more as beginner head The

:28:55. > :29:00.member for Taunton Deane spoke about her contribution and her experience

:29:01. > :29:06.as an environmental comment`tor and I'm grateful for her comments and

:29:07. > :29:10.involvement in this debate. A key point was made that we can have

:29:11. > :29:13.emission reductions and grow our economy and I agree. We are seeing

:29:14. > :29:19.the uncoupling of growth and emissions. PwC and a low carbon

:29:20. > :29:27.index this year shows that for the first time a global GDP grew and

:29:28. > :29:33.energy emissions from carbon dioxide only rose by a tiny percent and the

:29:34. > :29:37.UK is at the forefront of this. That is against the backdrop of ` growing

:29:38. > :29:47.economy. We are already bendfiting from the transition to a low carbon

:29:48. > :29:50.economy. 2013, -- 2013 the `nnual turnover was the equivalent of twice

:29:51. > :29:54.the auto manufacturing and food and drinks industries. The membdr for

:29:55. > :30:01.Glasgow North talked about the highlight -- the importance of

:30:02. > :30:05.justice and climate finance. This is a critical area for a deal hn

:30:06. > :30:09.Paris. The pledge is to demonstrate the developed world can mobhlise 100

:30:10. > :30:16.yen dollars a year by 2020 to help developing countries -- $100

:30:17. > :30:24.billion. That is where the TK must play a leading role. The honourable

:30:25. > :30:27.member for Brighton are really in shared her view that we are making

:30:28. > :30:34.insufficient progress. But where I agree with her is in the wider

:30:35. > :30:40.economy, as set out by Mark Carney. The honourable member for

:30:41. > :30:44.Cambridge, is a new member, has led the skill of calling for unhty -

:30:45. > :30:47.unity then attacking governlent policy. I would urge him to look at

:30:48. > :30:55.the statement I made yesterday setting out a full energy policy.

:30:56. > :31:03.The member for Aberdeen South made comments showing the agreemdnts we

:31:04. > :31:09.can have growth and lower c`rbon emissions and I and alighted about

:31:10. > :31:14.his support for offshore wind. The honourable member for Wigan, I am

:31:15. > :31:18.delighted to say we do welcome her commitment and we share her feelings

:31:19. > :31:23.of urgency about what we ard trying to achieve here. It is disappointing

:31:24. > :31:27.the opposition chooses to wdaponise our different focus on how to

:31:28. > :31:32.achieve this. In what should be a cross-party approach. But I am going

:31:33. > :31:39.to glide over that and simply agree with her that we are united as a

:31:40. > :31:45.country and as a house in w`nting an ambitious, legally binding deal in

:31:46. > :31:50.Paris with regular reviews `nd a long-term goal. Paris will not be

:31:51. > :31:54.the end. But the moment when the world changes direction and

:31:55. > :32:05.kick-starts a revolution to a new kind of growth and developmdnt.

:32:06. > :32:09.I am very grateful to all honourable members who have contributed to this

:32:10. > :32:14.debate. It has been an excellent debate. It was worth having this

:32:15. > :32:20.debate. It is very, very important. Over the next few weeks, many people

:32:21. > :32:26.will have their eyes and Paris. They will be hoping and praying for a

:32:27. > :32:32.good agreement. I will give the last words to Pope France. May wd protect

:32:33. > :32:36.the world and not prey on it, may we so beauty, not pollution and

:32:37. > :32:40.destruction. And lighter th`n those who possess power and money that

:32:41. > :32:45.they may avoid the same of indifference -- enlighten. That they

:32:46. > :32:50.may love the common good and love this world in which we live. Help us

:32:51. > :32:56.to protect all life to prep`re for a better future.

:32:57. > :33:01.The question is as on the order paper, as many rough that opinions

:33:02. > :33:13.say I've. The country, no. The ayes have it. Debate is now on ndw cancer

:33:14. > :33:17.strategy. I beg to move the motion in my name and other honour`ble

:33:18. > :33:24.members. I want to begin by thanking the backbench business commhttee for

:33:25. > :33:29.granting this timely debate. I would also like to thank both fellow

:33:30. > :33:32.officers of the all-party Parliamentary group on cancdr, some

:33:33. > :33:38.of whom are participating in this debate. And the offices of the other

:33:39. > :33:43.cancer specific all-party groups who have joined me in applying for this

:33:44. > :33:49.debate. This is all the cancer a peep P is coming together. We have

:33:50. > :33:53.is a civic issues we want to raise -- the cancer groups. We ard all

:33:54. > :33:59.agreed on debating the new cancer strategy debated by the Cancer task

:34:00. > :34:07.force. I hope, Mr Speaker, xou will not mind I mention that on December

:34:08. > :34:10.the 8th, the all-party group will hold our annual conference hn

:34:11. > :34:15.central hole, the largest g`thering of the cancer community in the

:34:16. > :34:20.country. I would like to invite all members to join us on the d`y -

:34:21. > :34:23.central hole. I would also like to thank the Minister on the front

:34:24. > :34:28.bench. In into the shoes of the cancer Minister who cannot be with

:34:29. > :34:35.us today. She is a good fridnd of the cancer community. To help him, I

:34:36. > :34:42.have sent him an advance copy of the speech. He may not be able to answer

:34:43. > :34:45.all the questions but I look forward to receiving his responses hn

:34:46. > :34:49.writing for those who cannot give today. Perhaps we need to rdmind

:34:50. > :34:57.ourselves of the challenge. There are currently 2.5 million pdople

:34:58. > :35:01.living with cancer in the UK. By the end of next year, there is dxpected

:35:02. > :35:07.to be 1,000 people diagnosed with cancer everyday. MacMillan Cancer

:35:08. > :35:15.Support suggest in a few ye`rs' time, one in two people will have

:35:16. > :35:19.been affected by cancer. And the challenge of delivering world cancer

:35:20. > :35:21.outcomes for these patients is growing ever greater. Hospital

:35:22. > :35:26.admissions for cancer in England have gone up by 100,000 a ydar

:35:27. > :35:31.compared with five years ago. The NHS has now missed the targdt for

:35:32. > :35:37.cancer patients receiving a first treatment within 62 days of an

:35:38. > :35:42.urgent referral by 17 months and still the outcomes continue to lag

:35:43. > :35:49.behind other European countdrparts. Research has shown the one-xear

:35:50. > :35:52.cancer survival rate in the UK is around 13 percentage points behind

:35:53. > :35:57.the rest in Europe, which is around 81%. That may not sound likd a big

:35:58. > :36:05.figure but it means that solewhere in the region of 10,000 livds a year

:36:06. > :36:10.on needlessly lost because the answers were in large part diagnosed

:36:11. > :36:16.too late. -- the cancer was diagnosed. This is the backdrop for

:36:17. > :36:21.which the task force delivered a new cancer strategy in July which the

:36:22. > :36:24.cancer community welcomes. Like others campaigning for improvements

:36:25. > :36:30.in services, I was disappointed to see the task force report ended up

:36:31. > :36:37.being a report to the NHS and its bodies rather than a report of the

:36:38. > :36:40.NHS and its bodies. I do not think that was the original intention

:36:41. > :36:48.That should not detract frol the excellent work that went into it and

:36:49. > :36:51.our congratulations should go to the group for the hard work on this

:36:52. > :36:56.document and strategy. The recommendations of the strategy

:36:57. > :36:58.based on evidence and advicd from organisations across the cancer

:36:59. > :37:04.community including the all part entry group on cancer, --

:37:05. > :37:08.Parliamentary. It covers early diagnosis through to care and end of

:37:09. > :37:13.life and aims to deliver a radical improvement in outcomes by 2020

:37:14. > :37:17.Since its publication, the strategy has been welcomed by the government,

:37:18. > :37:24.by the Health Secretary and the charities and the various c`ncer

:37:25. > :37:28.all-party groups in this pl`ce. Attention must now turn to

:37:29. > :37:33.implementation. For the task force report. Let me congratulate the

:37:34. > :37:36.ministers on pre-empting thd spending review in at least two

:37:37. > :37:40.microwaves already by committing the government to two of the

:37:41. > :37:46.strategies. The first is a commitment to ensuring all patients

:37:47. > :37:50.received a definitive diagnosis within four weeks of referr`l by a

:37:51. > :37:59.GP and a commitment to ensure all patients are at offered a rdcovery

:38:00. > :38:05.at it by 2020. -- a recoverx package. But the recommendations

:38:06. > :38:08.will only deliver a change hf implemented together as a whole And

:38:09. > :38:15.so urgency in commenting thd remainder of the strategy is

:38:16. > :38:20.important -- implement in. H ask the Minister when he expect to publish

:38:21. > :38:26.the implementation, what degree of consultation he envisages bdfore

:38:27. > :38:30.publication and what the Brhtish -- what assurances he can ensure

:38:31. > :38:35.ministers will ensure the plan contains earmarked resources for

:38:36. > :38:41.implementing the recommendations? May I briefly touch upon thd

:38:42. > :38:45.importance of early diagnoshs? One of the key priorities identhfied

:38:46. > :38:48.within the strategy is earlher diagnosis and this is of particular

:38:49. > :38:55.interest to be all-party Parliamentary group on cancdr and

:38:56. > :39:00.other all-party groups. Somd of you will be aware, the all-partx group

:39:01. > :39:06.campaigned on improving early diagnosis, what we call cancer's

:39:07. > :39:09.magic key. The logic behind the campaign is exceedingly simple.

:39:10. > :39:14.Evidence shows people who are diagnosed earlier on more lhkely to

:39:15. > :39:22.survive over one year and therefore to survive cancer generally.

:39:23. > :39:28.I am very grateful to my honourable friend for giving way. I warmly

:39:29. > :39:33.congratulate him and all thd cancer groups for securing this important

:39:34. > :39:36.debate. The issue he is raising of early diagnosis is absolutely key,

:39:37. > :39:42.as he is rightly pointing ott. My mother regrettably in 2012 died of

:39:43. > :39:47.acute myeloid leukaemia, shd was diagnosed on the day before her

:39:48. > :39:54.death. This is an issue we really do need to bear down on and also paid

:39:55. > :39:57.tribute to charities like blood wise who do important work in

:39:58. > :40:04.highlighting this area of c`ncer. By all means. Heartfelt sympathies

:40:05. > :40:12.with regards to his mother, but he is absolutely right. Charithes, many

:40:13. > :40:18.across the charitable sector, they are realising the importancd of

:40:19. > :40:25.early diagnosis. One statistic. When it came to our concert, spe`king at

:40:26. > :40:29.an avengers today at with rdgards to that disease, it is clear, 80% of

:40:30. > :40:36.people dies nosed in the early stages of bowel cancer survhve over

:40:37. > :40:41.ten years. That 90% figure drops to just 5% if they are diagnosdd at a

:40:42. > :40:46.later stage. That is the difference of earlier diagnosis. The logic

:40:47. > :40:53.behind focusing on earlier diagnosis is very simple. What we found over a

:40:54. > :40:56.number of years was that thd NHS is as good as any other health care

:40:57. > :41:00.system at getting patients from the one-year point to diagnosis to the

:41:01. > :41:04.five-year point, but it is poor at getting them to the one-year point

:41:05. > :41:12.in the first place. That wotld suggest we are not good at detecting

:41:13. > :41:17.cancer. That is where we lose the vast majority of those 10,000 lives,

:41:18. > :41:25.at that early phase, that one-year phase. It is very difficult to catch

:41:26. > :41:31.up and catch those 10,000 lhves It is simply not possible. We need to

:41:32. > :41:35.do more on earlier diagnosis. Getting the NHS to focus on the

:41:36. > :41:39.one-year figures will encourage initiatives at the front line

:41:40. > :41:44.promoting earlier diagnosis by putting the one-year figures up in

:41:45. > :41:48.lights, so we can ensure thd local NHS realises they are being

:41:49. > :41:51.monitored and therefore it hs up to them to introduce a range of

:41:52. > :41:58.initiatives to best suit thdir local populations. Elderly, whatever.

:41:59. > :42:03.Adapt the initiatives at a local level and the range of inithatives

:42:04. > :42:06.that can be included can range from everything from encouraging better

:42:07. > :42:11.screening takes, that awareness campaigns, education, better

:42:12. > :42:16.diagnostics at primary care, better GP referral rates. All or any of

:42:17. > :42:22.these could be improved at ` local level to do drive up early

:42:23. > :42:25.diagnosis. As well as being better for patients, I suggest earlier

:42:26. > :42:33.diagnosis can also save the NHS money. Is decisive help on cancer UK

:42:34. > :42:37.publish a report setting out cost savings on diagnosing a pathent

:42:38. > :42:47.early. One example is stage one treatment which costs ?3300 on colon

:42:48. > :42:50.cancer. Stage four is ?12,500. A notable difference. If you look at

:42:51. > :42:54.the range of cancer and number of patients involved, you could quite

:42:55. > :43:00.literally save hundreds of lillions of pounds if you could raisd your

:43:01. > :43:04.game and diagnosed early whdn it came to answer. The all-party group

:43:05. > :43:09.and the wider cancer communhty including the cancer campaigning

:43:10. > :43:12.group worked with the government and NHS England, and this has bden a

:43:13. > :43:16.collaborative approach, and I congratulate the government most

:43:17. > :43:19.heartily on listening to our concerns. We have campaigned

:43:20. > :43:24.together to get these one-ydar figures into the DNA of the 1 HS.

:43:25. > :43:31.Have got it into the NHS outcomes framework. -- the NHS. Last year, we

:43:32. > :43:37.had a successful campaign to ensure an indicator of one-year survival

:43:38. > :43:40.rate is delivered in the CCG assurance framework from April this

:43:41. > :43:45.year. For the moment, this hs the primary mechanism by which CCG is

:43:46. > :43:51.get held to account and manx have said it is the primary tool they use

:43:52. > :43:58.to determine priorities at ` local level. With the one-year figure up

:43:59. > :44:01.in lights in the top tier of NHS accountability, commissioners will

:44:02. > :44:07.be encouraged to take action by their local area to improve earlier

:44:08. > :44:12.diagnosis and cancer surviv`l rates. Many could then, job done. Xou have

:44:13. > :44:17.got it into the DNA of the NHS, we have got it into the radar of CCGs,

:44:18. > :44:24.is there anything else will should be doing? Except following through

:44:25. > :44:28.those initiatives. However, many are concerned that the recently proposed

:44:29. > :44:33.changes to the accountability system for CCGs may undermine this work. A

:44:34. > :44:37.few weeks ago, the Secretarx of State announced a new scorecard for

:44:38. > :44:43.measuring the performance of CCGs which would involve each CCG being

:44:44. > :44:49.awarded an Ofsted style rathng to take effect from April next year.

:44:50. > :44:52.Whilst improving accountability is something which the all

:44:53. > :44:57.Parliamentary group supports in principle, we strongly advocate on

:44:58. > :45:02.behalf of the cancer communhty that the use of the one-year figtres to

:45:03. > :45:06.drive earlier diagnosis at ` local level is not lost throughout this

:45:07. > :45:10.process. So will the Ministdr outlined in further detail the

:45:11. > :45:14.Governor on's plan to implelent a CCG scorecard, the process by which

:45:15. > :45:18.the metrics relating to answer will be determined and confirm that the

:45:19. > :45:24.focus on one-year survival rates will not be diluted? May I `lso

:45:25. > :45:30.raise with the Minister the issue of the reforms suggested in thd cancer

:45:31. > :45:34.strategy regarding the patidnt pathway is to mark with the growing

:45:35. > :45:39.number of people surviving cancer, it is important to make improvements

:45:40. > :45:45.throughout the cancer pathw`y and there are two key issues. Wd know

:45:46. > :45:49.too often, patients report being treated as a set of symptoms rather

:45:50. > :45:52.than a person and certain groups of patients, mainly older people,

:45:53. > :45:58.ethnic minorities and those with rarer answers, report poor patient

:45:59. > :46:04.experience. -- cancer. In addition, we know many cancer patients like

:46:05. > :46:07.the support to get on with their life after treatment has ended. The

:46:08. > :46:11.all-party Parliamentary grotp welcomes the increased focus on

:46:12. > :46:13.patient experience across the NHS that we need to do more to hnsure we

:46:14. > :46:27.have the right drive improvdments. Whilst the survey is a useftl tool,

:46:28. > :46:31.to from the data is difficult to assess and not widely used. The

:46:32. > :46:35.cancer strategy recommends creating a new metric to measure pathent

:46:36. > :46:39.experience across the whole pathway. Will the Minister set out how he

:46:40. > :46:45.plans, or the parliament pl`ns, to implement the strategy is

:46:46. > :46:48.recommendation on a new pathent experience metric, including how it

:46:49. > :46:53.will ensure that the data is used effectively to drive improvdment at

:46:54. > :46:57.a local level? Will he also confirmed there will be sufficient

:46:58. > :47:02.resources for both the new letric and the cancer patient experience

:47:03. > :47:05.survey? We welcome the Government's commitment to ensure all patients

:47:06. > :47:10.have access to a recovery p`ckage following treatment. However, if we

:47:11. > :47:14.are to fully address this challenge it is vital the NHS underst`nds

:47:15. > :47:18.where it is working well and where improvements are needed. It is vital

:47:19. > :47:21.that the recommendation of the strategy on of the new

:47:22. > :47:25.quality-of-life metric is t`ken forward as a priority. Will the

:47:26. > :47:29.Minister ensure that governlent s commitment to take forward the

:47:30. > :47:33.commend Asian of developing a quality-of-life metric is b`cked

:47:34. > :47:39.with clear plans for funding and implementation. In the few linutes

:47:40. > :47:43.that remain for me, may I address a couple of key issues, including

:47:44. > :47:48.rarer cancers and the Cancer Drugs Fund? It is an interesting fact that

:47:49. > :47:51.the combined number of rarer cancers, cancers that are ldss

:47:52. > :47:56.common than breast, lung, prostate and bowel cancer, itself outnumbers

:47:57. > :48:02.the sum total of those more common cancers. Services for peopld with

:48:03. > :48:06.rarer cancers are no less ilportant. We need to make sure people with

:48:07. > :48:10.rarer cancers get access to the right level of specialist expertise,

:48:11. > :48:15.irrespective of where they live The task force recommendation about

:48:16. > :48:18.creating highly specialised services for rarer cancers is partictlarly

:48:19. > :48:24.welcome. Can the Minister assure the house this will happen and that they

:48:25. > :48:27.will be supported with the technology to deliver speci`list

:48:28. > :48:34.care without inconveniencing the patient? Furthermore, research

:48:35. > :48:37.efforts into rarer cancers need to be redoubled. The Government is

:48:38. > :48:43.leading the world in its investment in genomics my most notably through

:48:44. > :48:47.its 100,000 genomics project, which is sequencing the Gino 's of those

:48:48. > :48:53.with cancer and rare diseasds in general. It is good news th`t so far

:48:54. > :48:56.it has fully sequenced 5000 patients, but can he update the

:48:57. > :49:02.house is to progress with c`ncer patients? May I also suggest that

:49:03. > :49:06.once complete, genomics England independently carries forward the

:49:07. > :49:10.research for the benefit of the NHS and patients, given its excdllent

:49:11. > :49:16.track record. I am short of time, but by all means. Thank you for

:49:17. > :49:19.giving way. Is he worried that particularly those companies that