As I read this clause, it has to be looked at in relation to the next one. As I understand it, Clause 48 deals with the assessment of the risks involved and what actions might be needed. It is the next clause that deals with the programme of action being proposed. I would have assumed that a careful and rigorous assessment of risk had to be drawn up thoroughly. I hope that will not change every year; you cannot have consequential policies that change annually. The measures and the programme of action that follow from the subsequent paragraph will be on the basis of the risk assessment.
I do not find it quite as unacceptable as other noble Lords that that risk assessment, setting out any risks that we have to face up to and programmes of action that are needed, would take some time in the first instance, nor is it unacceptable that this would not require a reassessment of those strategic risks every year. That is not to say that if events happen, that will not require a reassessment—although the noble Baroness, Lady Young, is far more qualified to comment on that than me.
If there is to be any continuity of policy, it is essential that the risk assessment in Clause 48 is done rigorously, thoroughly and not in a way that invites change every year. If we kept getting that assessment so wrong that measures flowing from the programme of action in Clause 49 had to be changed, it would be chaotic. The idea of a considered and measured approach to assessing the risk and then reporting on that to Parliament, with reports on assessing risk being laid no more than every five years, is fairly reasonable. If something came up that made a reassessment of risks necessary, that would not prevent a reappraisal happening, but to insist that there be an annual risk assessment in this way is unnecessary—unless there are matters that require that. It is under Clause 49, which we are not yet able to discuss, that a programme of adaptation would come forward. Again, that programme should be adhered to in the medium and long term. One thing is certain: you could not implement everything in the first year. There will be a programme of action over a period of years. We will discuss that clause when we come to it. I do not see that the Government have got this wrong in this paragraph. I hope the Minister can reassure me, or I may have to agree with noble Lords opposite.
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 c265-6 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-11 17:47:24 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438303
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438303
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_438303