---

Renewable Energy (S&T Report)

My Lords, I was sorry to hear that intervention from the Front Bench, as this is possibly one of the most important debates that we could have at this time. It is really rather shocking that it has been limited to three hours, when so many experts have spent the best part of a year considering an issue facing not only our society but that of the world. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Oxburgh, for his excellent chairmanship of the committee, and for the expert advice of Professor Dennis Anderson and Dr   Chris Elliot, who were immensely helpful during the preparation and maintenance of our inquiry. I also want to draw attention to the Select Committee’s report of 2000, chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, Science and Society. He drew attention to something of extreme importance to our deliberation. That is that we face a growing suspicion of technology in Britain. The 1999–2000 report was effectively stimulated by the crisis over CJD, but since then we have had the triple vaccine, problems over nuclear waste—which are not being effectively answered by government—foot and mouth disease and many other scientific issues. Among the most important scientific issue ever to face our society is global warming. In fact, at a science conference for the public just a week ago in Cheltenham—the science festival—the government’s chief adviser, Sir David King, suggested that it was the most important crisis facing the world today. It was interesting to see how many of his audience, all lay people, agreed with him. I am very glad that the noble Lord, Lord Chorley, and my noble friend Lord Haworth have already drawn attention to this problem, but I want to draw attention to only one paragraph in our report. We recommend to the Government themselves to initiate and promote full and public dialogue both at national and local levels on the advantages and problems of renewable energy. Frankly, the government response to that small but essential paragraph is lamentably poor. The DTI refers us to its website, ““It’s Only Natural””, at www.dti.gov.uk/renewables. I suspect that few people in the United Kingdom would bother to dial up that website, to which I shall return in a second. Although people now generally agree that global warming is a problem—incidentally, at the Cheltenham science festival, on a vote, 92 per cent of the audience recognised it is being very important, probably as important as any other scientific issue facing us—and that was before Sir David King spoke and that non-scientific audience had had a chance to hear what he had to say. It was also interesting that more than 50 per cent of that audience—as I have seen at other science festivals—supported nuclear power. By comparison, almost 80 per cent—as the Government have reported from the result of their MORI poll—are in favour of wind power. But once deliberation went to the understanding of wind power, it was clear that few members of the public have a clue what are likely to be its real disadvantages and limitations, as we have heard so eloquently described this afternoon. My noble friend Lord Whitty, in his brave speech, if I may say so, said something very important. He said that behaviour will not change of itself. He called for more regulation, for fiscal methods, market changes and so on, all of which I think are absolutely correct if we are to have better energy efficiency and use of power and some way out of the morass that we face. However, for that to be accepted, we must also have public engagement. As far as I can understand it, the Government’s idea of public engagement is a kind of loose communication typified by the website. The website features four areas of public news. In the ““events”” section, it draws attention to conferences; trade promotion service events; the Regional Heartlands pilot tour; and the renewable energy science quiz. The website mentions, I think, five events—one in London, one in Aberdeen this year, one in Paris, one in Germany and two in China. In the trade promotion events section, which will be of limited interest to the public anyway, it lists one in England, one in Aberdeen, two in China, one in France, one in New York, one in Malaysia and one in Toronto. When you click on ““Regional Heartlands Pilot Tour””, the website tells you:"““The DTI renewable energy tour is now over. Please check this page regularly for further information””." That message also applies to the renewable energy quiz science venue tour. I am afraid that we are not taking public engagement seriously, and that is a good example. In any case, engagement does not mean just simple education by communication; it means listening to the response of the public. It is not a cheap endeavour; it requires expertise. At present, we are not having any dialogue. We are having very limited communication and, above all, the Government have taken no steps, as far as I can see, to measure the impact of what they are doing in public education. We need to tackle the issue in the schools. This year, I have given talks in, I think, 18 or 20 schools to pupils of all ages—from primary school to A-level—so I think that I know something about what I am saying about science understanding. It is clear that children learning from the national curriculum have no concept of the disaster that might face them in two or three decades’ time. That is our responsibility, and it is what the Government must focus on and come to terms with, as they speak to and listen to the public.