Climate Change Bill [HL]

I support my noble friend’s amendment. I can understand why the Minister would make the intervention that he did because he comes from Defra, where I am sure biodiversity is always at the front of his mind. But at other departments, such as the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, the Department for Transport and the Department for Communities and Local Government, bio-diversity is not always at the front of people’s minds. Although they have a duty to regard it, it is very low down the list of priorities. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, that this is presentational. It is important for that reason. If the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, had been here for the debate on the Severn barrage introduced by my noble friend Lord Livsey, he would have heard about the worries and the balance that will have to be weighed on renewable energies. The Severn barrage particularly highlights the fact that, while it can produce 5 per cent of energy from a renewable source, there will probably be an enormous habitat loss. That will be a balance that the Secretary of State will have to weigh up, and that the committee will have to consider. If the value of biodiversity is not made explicit in the Bill, it may be easier for the Secretary of State to make a decision that might be popular with people because it will impinge less on their lifestyle than others, but will impinge much more on habitat. We must give habitat and biodiversity a fighting chance by putting them in the Bill.