I have two or three points to clarify with the Minister. I think that I am right in saying that the amendments apply to individual trading schemes as opposed to the overall figure for the net UK position. As drafted, clearly for probing purposes, Amendment No. 167 indicates a limit of 25 per cent on any scheme, which raises one or two issues. First, is it legally possible under some trading schemes where UK participants are entirely free to trade within the European Union to set a limit on their ability to buy credits from elsewhere in the EU—up to, say, a quarter of their target? As drafted, the amendment raises the issue of whether a limit can be set in UK terms when we are involved in an EU trading scheme. That is an important issue if we apply it not to an overall position but to an individual trading scheme.
The second issue is just to express a doubt. On aviation, it is highly likely that over the years two or three things will happen. First, aviation will continue to grow considerably and we shall be unable to hold that tide back. We may hold it back to a degree but it will continue to grow. Secondly, aviation will not be able to introduce carbon emission reduction schemes fast enough to offset that growth for a considerable time. If, as I understand it, the European scheme sets the cap at the average of the previous three or four years, that raises the interesting question of how aviation will cope. It is likely to be in one of two ways: in the early years by buying credits from outside the European Union, through the clean development mechanism, and so on; and over time by increasingly squeezing other sectors in the EU by pushing up the price of carbon, hence making it expensive for other industries that can undertake carbon emission reduction measures.
Whether or not aviation would get caught in that would depend very much on its remaining part of the Emissions Trading Scheme in the European Union as a whole, which is the current intention, or on moves being renewed in the European Parliament to keep aviation separate if, despite the current intention, aviation being part of the trading scheme is not yet embodied in law. If we passed an amendment such as this, or even an amendment in the spirit of this one, aviation would be in a tough position. In effect, we would be telling people that we were going to stop aviation growth in this country.
Climate Change Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Woolmer of Leeds
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 January 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Climate Change Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c249 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-11 17:47:28 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438274
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438274
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438274