I do not suppose that the Minister needs any further urging to resist the amendment, but I would encourage him to do so, because the science of climate change is difficult and imprecise and is always subject to short-term fixes. Experts are always saying, ““Goodness, the evidence shows that we suddenly have anomalies””, and a three-year database will quite clearly create further uncertainty. I therefore believe that my noble friend is right to say on this occasion that a five-year period is reasonable. It also, incidentally, chimes quite well with international agreements. The Kyoto agreement is on a five-year budget, and so for that matter is the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, so a five-year period makes perfect sense.
Climate Change Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl of Selborne
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 11 December 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Climate Change Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
697 c217 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:37:49 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429332
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429332
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429332