---

Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill

My Lords, we on these Benches are very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, for introducing the Bill. It contains many measures that we have called for over time and many measures that we debated with him when he was Minister for Defra. I recognise the part that he and my noble friend Lady Maddock played in the organisations to which they both referred when they declared their interests. They have played a tremendous role in bringing forward these very practical measures. The noble Lord, Lord Whitty, mentioned Al Gore and David Attenborough and the part that they have played in raising the consciousness of the public. Although I recognise the frustration of the noble Lord, Lord Tanlaw, in the length of time that that may have taken, nevertheless, consciousness has now been raised, although the danger is that unless the public can do some very tangible things, they will descend into depression and perhaps denial. It is one thing to be told that this is happening and that it is dangerous, but if there is very little that an individual can do about it that simply breeds despair. The practical measures in the Bill are particularly important. Although it is a starting point, it is an extremely important one. The role of the UK is mentioned in the first clause of the Bill:"““The . . . purpose of this Act is to enhance the United Kingdom’s contribution to combating climate change””." The United Kingdom contributes in two ways. The first is by reducing its own emissions, as the Bill intends we should, at a much more effective rate. The noble Lord who asked whether emissions had increased or decreased over recent years will be depressed to know that they have increased. Not only should we decrease our emissions, important though that is, and lead by example, as other noble Lords have mentioned; we should also generate an absolute hotbed of research and development and innovation. Stimulating the economy to produce various types of generation economically will play a critical role in how that technology is spread throughout the world. Only recently, technology developed off the coast of Scotland was bought by Portugal for use there. That kind of technology will be critical with the populations of developing counties such as China and India looking for a way to develop economically, but within environmental parameters that will not endanger the entire planet. The noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury, will of course recall that, over time, he and I have debated the issue of tidal lagoons. China, indeed, is interested in tidal lagoons. Would it not be wonderful if off the coast of Britain the first pilot tidal lagoon was created? No money from his department is needed, only private finance, but such technology needs encouragement and assurance that the regulatory framework is as friendly as possible. It has tremendous export potential for a country such as China, where the tidal rise and fall are equivalent to ours. Looking around my own area of the Severn estuary and up the entire west coast of England, that technology has tremendous potential. Perhaps the Minister would comment on where his department has got to in supporting it—as I mentioned, I do not mean financially. My noble friend Lady Maddock talked about the importance of microgeneration and of targets which are particularly crucial for all the reasons that she mentioned. She referred in her speech to the document I Will if You Will, which the Sustainable Consumption Round Table produced recently. It makes several good suggestions in its section on recommendations for our homes, which are particularly relevant in our debate this afternoon. Critical to that is improved householder feedback about consumption, because the roundtable’s members have discovered that that appears to be a cost-effective way to tackle energy demand. The roundtable is asking for legislation to be introduced to enable Ofgem to implement a national meter replacement programme by 2012, which is a short timescale. It would ensure that all households can benefit from smart meters which enable households to monitor and manage their own energy use. Smart meters would tell one exactly how much energy one is using at any one time. They make plain, for example, the effect when one turns off an appliance—the TV left on standby and so on. I am pleased, as I know my noble friend Lord Redesdale is, to see the clause in the Bill about the dynamic demand technology, which is important. We have the technology so we should not have to use more energy than is necessary. The important role that local councils can play has been mentioned and was mentioned in the I Will if You Will report. Beyond piloting schemes that show what can be done, they can take a role that Braintree council chose to pilot, for example, which is offering one-off council tax rebates for households. I ask the Minister if he thinks that that is a reasonable way forward. The recommendation in this report is that the Treasury, Defra and the ODPM should review nationally the potential for rebates on council tax and stamp duty to reward more sustainable households. If households started to implement many of the Bill’s measures, would they be able to benefit from such a measure as this? Councils could not offer the rebate if they were not able to claim back the money nationally because of the way in which council finance is currently set up. That would not be a practical way forward. They are already squeezed until the pips squeak. While I am referring to councils, I would also like to highlight a particularly innovative approach taken by Chesterfield Borough Council—which incidentally and for entirely justifiable reasons was Liberal Democrat green council of the year. Besides implementing some of the other innovations that I acknowledge other councils have taken, such as putting photovoltaics on the roofs of public buildings and so on, Chesterfield has also forged a very exciting partnership with Barratt Homes. The latter agreed to the council’s request that 10 per cent of the properties in a new development of 280 homes would be equipped with solar panels. I accept that that is only 28 homes but it is a start. It shows people that it is perfectly possible for a recognised housebuilder such as Barratt to equip new homes with solar panels. Barratt’s East Midlands managing director states:"““Barratt is the country’s most forward thinking builder””—" he would say that, wouldn’t he?—"““especially when it comes to incorporating environmentally friendly features in our new homes. Chesterfield Borough Council is also a leader in the field and we feel this is the ideal partnership””." We need many more such partnerships. Besides being a showpiece development which encourages other housebuilders to incorporate that technology, it also shows consumers in Chesterfield what solar panels can contribute. At this stage I ought to declare two interests. First, I received a grant from the DTI to install solar panels on my roof. At this time of year we do not need to run our boiler to have boiling hot showers. The effectiveness of solar panels in heating water, even on a cloudy day, has been a complete eye opener. Secondly, I declare an interest as patron of the Somerset Trust for Sustainable Development, which encourages measures such as those mentioned in the Bill. It has just finished its first development of homes in Langport, which makes use of such obvious measures as passive solar gain. That does not even require the installation of specific technology; it is just a question of angling the house so that the biggest windows capture the sun’s heat. The houses in the development have incorporated in them very clever blinds which mean that in the summer householders will not need air conditioning, which is a danger of too much passive solar gain. The noble Lord, Lord Judd, made some extremely telling points. His comments on pylons and transmission are incredibly important. If households generate as much energy as they can and save as much as they can and communities have community generation schemes, a localised network can be established. The enormous transmission schemes to which the noble Lord referred, which comprise pylons which have desecrated some of our finest landscapes, are also incredibly wasteful. Can the Minister say exactly how much electricity is lost due to the way in which the grid operates? I share with the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, the feeling that Clause 13—I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, will explain why it is important—grates slightly with the rest of the Bill, which is about carrots and enabling. After all, the Government have not done an awful lot about upping the building regulations requirements in this regard—over the years they could have required much greater improvements, as we have called for—but suddenly, rather than enabling and encouraging, Clause 13 mentions prosecutions. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, will tell us that there is a good reason for that. It will be interesting to hear it. We on the Liberal Democrat Benches hope that the Bill has a swift passage through this House. It contains many measures that we welcome. We look forward with great excitement to its passing into law. Having given the Bill a very broad welcome, I regret that the Government did not introduce a similar Bill themselves some time ago, and that a Private Member’s Bill, with all the limitations that such a Bill entails, has been introduced to tackle the matter.