Climate Change Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 164A: 164A: Clause 36, page 17, line 34, leave out ““relevant national authority”” and insert ““Secretary of State”” The noble Earl said: This Bill makes it clear that the Secretary of State and the Committee on Climate Change have at every turn to consult the national authorities, although the latter have been given powers to give guidance and even directions to the committee. Furthermore, Clause 71 lays down that national authorities are to be treated as part of the UK, except for waste reduction schemes, climate change in Wales and fines. It is surprising therefore to read that national authorities may set up their own trading schemes. It is even more surprising to realise that this part of the Bill defines a trading scheme, sets broad limits on its activities, defines who the national authorities are and goes into some detail about the making of regulations and the giving of guidance, directions and grants, but says nothing about the scope of trading schemes. Are they each unique? Schedule 2 refers to activities occurring in various locations and to activities of a particular kind carried on in the UK or in part of the UK. Is this a clever way to make sure that the work is divided between the various authorities? For instance, Scotland would deal with schemes in transport and agriculture for the UK as a whole, while Wales would take manufacturing, shops, offices and commercial premises and England would have the NHS, the armed services and schools. Alternatively, is it intended that, for example, farmers in Scotland will have a trading scheme that reflects the way they have adopted the single farm payment scheme, while Wales and England have something different? Will the suppliers of gas and electricity find themselves dealing with three or four different schemes or will they face many schemes set up and run by three or four Administrations? Can a participant belong to more than one trading scheme? Will he be able to shop around? Will someone with interest in several places be able to put all those interests into the scheme that gives him the best deal? Will someone with several interests have to subscribe to a number of schemes? The Explanatory Notes seem to imply that the Secretary of State will make schemes only in those areas for which the national authorities do not have delegated powers. Page 29 of the Explanatory Notes says that Clause 39(7), "““provides that the Secretary of State has the power to make trading schemes in relation to all other matters””." Will suppliers of electricity, heating oil and road fuel have to cope with different paperwork for different end users? Will users have to submit different returns depending on where they have bought, used or saved energy? Will there be different measurements and calculations? These schemes were mentioned on Second Reading. I sensed a vague feeling of unease, but the main concentration was on the moral position of trading schemes using money from the West to buy savings in the developing economies. However, the noble Lord, Lord Haskel, referred to the different methods of calculation in use and my noble friend Lord Caithness to sectoral targets. How will trading schemes be controlled? Who will ensure that they are effective and efficient? Will there be a mechanism for preventing conflicting overlaps or areas where nothing is done? In Part 1of the Bill, the Secretary of State and the committee are constrained on 12 occasions to consult or inform the national authorities before taking action. In Part 3 on trading schemes, national authorities are twice required to obtain and take into account the advice of the committee. There are no such requirements in Schedules 2, 3 or 4 and there is nowhere any stipulation that the Secretary of State must approve proposals from the devolved Administrations. I beg to move.