Climate Change Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 122: 122: Schedule 1, page 38, line 16, after ““policy”” insert ““at national and international level”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, we had a long and constructive debate in Committee on the types of expertise that would be desirable in the composition of the committee. Having reflected on the discussions, I move two amendments which I hope will help to clarify the types of expertise that we believe are needed. Amendment No. 122 will make it clear that the committee should have expertise in climate policy at both national and international level. During our debate in Committee, I noted that while Clause 10 requires the committee to take, "““circumstances at European and international level””" into account, expertise of an international nature was not present in the list of desirable expertise for the committee as set out in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1. The amendment is intended to address this discrepancy. It is important as the UK’s approach to tackling climate change must be considered in the context of wider international effort and impacts, and a range of international issues will be relevant to the committee’s advice on budgets. It is therefore right that the committee has an appropriate awareness of the European and international context. Amendment No. 123 is intended to clarify that it would be desirable for the committee to have expertise not only in climate science but also in other branches of environmental science. Having reflected on our discussions in Committee, we are sympathetic to the arguments put forward in support of the Committee on Climate Change having some expertise in a wider range of areas than implied by the term ““climate science””. By including ““other branches of environmental science”” we make it explicit in the Bill that national authorities must have regard to the desirability of securing that the committee as a whole has this expertise. Like the other areas of expertise covered in the list, ““environmental science”” is of course a broad category. This is important as it provides the flexibility for the national authorities and the chair to appoint members with specific expertise within this broad area, as the committee’s work demands. For the record, I say once again that the list is neither exclusive nor exhaustive and that the national authorities could choose to appoint a member with expertise in an area not listed, if the national authorities and the chair thought it desirable. Furthermore, I reiterate that the Government continue to consider climate science to be the most important aspect of environmental science for the committee. However, by including ““environmental science”” on the list we are demonstrating that it will be important for the committee as a whole to have an understanding of the impacts of climate change on the natural environment. I beg to move.