Climate Change Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 51A: 51A: Clause 11, page 6, line 17, leave out ““Secretary of State”” and insert ““Prime Minister”” The noble Lord said: I shall speak also to the other amendments in this group. The amendments are designed to strengthen the Bill by recognising the need to drive the climate change policy agenda across government departments and by placing the Prime Minister and his Government centre stage in terms of accountability to Parliament. The amendments are refined versions of similar ones that we tabled in Committee. They would transfer from the Secretary of State to the Prime Minister the duty to report on policies for meeting the budgets and the duty to respond to the Committee on Climate Change’s reports on progress. We feel that this is of fundamental importance to the functioning of the Bill and to ensuring that climate change policy is implemented with the greatest possible focus. As I noted in Committee, climate change is a cross-departmental issue. Given the importance and sheer breadth of the issue, it is crucial to have the Prime Minister in a central position. The duties that these amendments would place on him are twofold. First, he would be required to lay the report before Parliament setting out the proposals and policies designed to meet the carbon budget. As these policies will affect nearly every government department, it is right that their announcement should come from the only person with responsibility that cuts across the board. The brief of the Secretary of State for Defra—or indeed any other Secretary of State—is simply not wide enough to ensure that these policies are driven across Whitehall with force sufficient to put them in the prime position in decision-making. The Minister himself knows, through his considerable ministerial experience, just how difficult that can be. His policy on public procurement of British produce by the Government and public bodies is just one example. The second duty is very similar. Under the Bill's current framework, the Committee on Climate Change is required to report on the progress and effectiveness of the measures. The Government are required to present their response to the committee before both Houses of Parliament. We feel most strongly that this response should be presented by the Prime Minister because it concerns how the Government are progressing as a whole in meeting their carbon budgets. We anticipate that the proposals and plans will be drawn up by government departments in consultation with the committee. However, whether these plans have been effectively driven across departments is manifestly not in the brief of the Secretary of State for Defra; only the Prime Minister has an adequate scope of responsibility and authority stretching across government. I turn briefly to a few of the objections raised in Committee. First, on precedence, the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, usefully pointed out that certain briefs such as defence, foreign affairs and the Home Department require the Prime Minister to sign off reports. The Minister claimed that these and other prime ministerial duties were accidents of history. However, this is certainly not the case. The Prime Minister is responsible because they affect the nation as a whole. The whole of this project needs very clear leadership to achieve the necessary goals. Combating climate change is a very necessary goal. I do not think that any Prime Minister would claim that his mandate with regard to the country’s national security is accidental but we can consider other recent legislation passed by this Government that does require the Prime Minister to lay reports before Parliament. For example, Clause 58 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 states: "““The Prime Minister shall lay before each House of Parliament a copy of every annual report made by the Interception of Communications Commissioner under subsection (4), together with a statement as to whether any matter has been excluded””." Here, as in our proposals, it is quite clear that it is not the duty of the Prime Minister to write the report or to take on the entire burden of its preparation in Downing Street; he is simply responsible for laying it before Parliament. This has a very real effect. If the Prime Minister receives the report and has responsibility for laying it before Parliament, this offers strong reassurance that the importance of the proposals to combat climate change is understood at the very highest level of government. This is the most effective way to ensure that climate change is a constant echo in Cabinet and in policy meetings across the Civil Service. It would also serve to strengthen the role of the committee. By having the Prime Minister’s commitment, the stature of the committee is also increased. This would be a welcome step towards cementing the climate change committee’s importance in government and in the eye of the public. The reason we offer these refinements to our amendments stems from the idea that the reports to which our previous amendments referred were of a scientific rather than a factual nature. Thus these new amendments refer to clauses that deal with the effectiveness of proposals and policies. We feel that placing the burden of presenting the reports on to the shoulder of the Prime Minister would be the best assurance that these policies and programmes are receiving the importance they deserve; namely, the highest importance. I beg to move.