Climate Change Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 17: 17: After Clause 2, insert the following new Clause— ““Statements of compatibility with Climate Change Act (1) A Minister of the Crown in charge of a Bill in either House of Parliament must, before the Second Reading of the Bill— (a) make a statement to the effect that in his view the provisions of the Bill are compatible with the principal aim of this Act (““a statement of compatibility””); or (b) make a statement to the effect that although he is unable to make a statement of compatibility, the government nevertheless wishes the House to proceed with the Bill. (2) The statement must be in writing and be published in such manner as the Minister making it considers appropriate.”” The noble Lord said: I continue on the same theme. This amendment is about the interaction of the Committee on Climate Change with the organs of government, namely parliamentary legislation: both Bills and orders. This idea, to give him credit, came from my noble friend Lord Cathcart, who I am sure was inspired by the fact that everything presented to the House carries the endorsement that the legislation is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. We feel that all legislation should carry an imprimatur about the Climate Change Bill. The one thing that we must be able to drive through government is the notion that everything that government does must bear the obligations of government to the success of the Climate Change Bill in mind. This is an effort to ensure that it has a real and wide-ranging effect on all policy decisions. We know that our government departments will be bound to have to bear in mind elements of the Bill, but it is not enough simply to pass the Bill. One of the goals of the Bill is to change the attitude towards climate change when Ministers are making decisions. This seems to be in keeping with that. Indeed, it is the only mechanism that assures us that that will be the case. I hope that the Minister will not shy away from something like this. It places the Climate Change Bill—or the Act as it may become—at the heart of government. It puts its position clearly on the face of all legislation. I believe that this is an important step towards establishing the policy of climate change as a priority of government across all departments and throughout all legislative activity. There may be some elements of legislation that are not compatible with climate change objectives. In such circumstances, it would be right and proper for anyone proposing such legislation to present a statement saying to what extent it was not compatible, why it was not possible for it to be compatible and what would be the consequences of the legislation on our climate change targets. That is not beyond the powers of Government, and it certainly guarantees that all government departments would take this seriously. I beg to move.