I thank the Minister for all that information. Briefly, I take the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Woolmer, about the timeframe. Clearly for many industries, particularly those where we are looking for carbon savings, five years is no time at all. He was right to take me up on that. However, we are clearly saying that there should still be a 15-year setting of budgets, even though they are in smaller segments.
The international argument does not actually work because there will almost certainly no longer be five-year periods post-2012. The intention, post-Kyoto, is for longer periods and therefore the five-year argument does not really work. Having said that, the carbon committee’s accountability and strength in making reports, and Parliament’s role in bringing the Government to account, are important parts of the equation. Within that total package, together with possible indicative targets and milestones, we will think about this area again. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 21 not moved.]
Climate Change Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Teverson
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c222 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:15:13 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429341
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429341
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_429341