---

Climate Change Bill [Lords]

I do not agree. Clause 10 is very specific when it states:"““The following matters must be taken into account””" both"““by the Secretary of State … and … by the Committee on Climate Change””." There is hardly any difference. There is a difference between the wording used in new clause 15 and amendment No. 72 and that used in new clause 14, and that is why I urge the House to reject any attempt to move to a vote on new clause 14. I want to endorse the comments made by the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer), who pointed out that in environmental policy, above all, we need a Government who are open, outward-looking and prepared to engage with the international community. Of course, my right hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Mr. Morley) pointed out earlier that aviation's inclusion in the EU emissions trading scheme was carried out under the UK presidency. Will the Minister say whether she thinks that that would have happened if the Government had had an irrational, obsessive Eurosceptic policy? As we move towards further negotiations on the precise methodology for including emissions from aviation and shipping, are we more or less likely to reach agreement with other nation states with a Government who are open, outward-looking, prepared to negotiate and positive about their membership of the EU or with a future Government less enthusiastic about the EU and determined to refuse to co-operate with the other member states? It is self-evident that the likelihood of any change of Government in the future is linked to that. The shadow spokesman, who is not in his place, worked himself up into a frenzy of excitement about the prospect of an incoming Conservative Government, but the likelihood of that happening is in inverse proportion to the continuation of the Opposition's irrational, obsessive hostility towards the EU and international co-operation more generally.