An amendment to the Energy Bill which would have set a target for carbon emissions target for the power industry was defeated by just 23 votes tonight. 16 Liberal Democrat MPs backed the amendment while 30 voted against it.
10 of the 16 are already on the Friends of the Earth website (plus Mike Hancock, who temporarily withdrew from the Whip last night).
They are:
Andrew George
Greg Mulholland
Julian Huppert
John Hemming
John Leech
Martin Horwood
Roger Williams
Andrew Stunnell
Mark Williams
Adrian Sanders
In addition, Tim Farron and Gordon Birtwistle supported it and Mike Thornton in his first act of rebellion since his election and Charles Kennedy tweeted their support.
I’m with @timfarron in backing a 2030 decarbonisation target. A Lib Dem policy which I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting.
— Charles Kennedy (@charles_kennedy) June 4, 2013
#2030decarb target narrowly defeated in Commons- I voted FOR a target. Thanks to all those that have been in touch to show their support.
— Mike Thornton MP (@Mike4Eastleigh) June 4, 2013
The final rebels, and thanks to Duncan Borrowman and James King for telling me so on Twitter, were Annette Brooke and John Pugh.
The rebels’ votes were consistent with policy passed at Party Conference last September.
UPDATE: In fact, although Charles supported the target, he didn’t take part in the vote. Our 16th rebel, as you can see from the comments below, was Stephen Williams, making his first vote against the whip.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Lord Bonkers: "Something less terrible than the truth"
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Tom Reeve
paul barker
Neil Hickman
Tom Bailey
expats
13 Comments
Don’t those 16 MPs know they’re not meant to vote for Liberal Democrat policies? 🙁
Not accurate! I voted for the amendment, my first vote against the Lib Dem whip. Charles Kennedy did not vote.
Once again the will of the majority of Scotland’s elected representatives is overruled at Westminster. Scotland has its own decarbonisation target but being fettered together with the UK is holding it back. This adds to the many issues where the behaviour of Westminster itself has shown that best way to deliver good Lib Dem policies in Scotland is through full independence following a Yes vote in next year’s referendum.
Well done Stephen!
The words ‘final’ and ‘straw’ spring to mind…
Thanks, Stephen. I had info that he was in favour of the amendment. I’ll amend the post.
Are not the two key questions for those Lib Dem MPs that voted against the amendment, as follows:
1) Would you have voted FOR the amendment had you not been ‘whipped? And
2) Do you consider leaving our planet in a reasonable condition more, or less important, than any coalition agreement?
It would be interesting to hear from some of them.
A big “thank you” to those 16 Lib Dem MPs who voted for a 2030 decarb target. As a Liberal supporter for over 30 years I am absolutely gutted by yesterday’s vote.
Interesting comment from Donna Hume from Friends of the Earth..” What’s my biggest disappointment? It has to be the Lib Dem leadership’s complete failure to stand by their climate change commitments – and their decision to side with George Osborne’s polluting dash for gas.”
Bit diffcult to know how any MP could vote for this given that it is crucially dependdnt on CO2 capture .. which may work in the future but doesnt work now.
I confess to being perplexed that there was a LibDem whip against decarbonisation targets. While I admit to having occasionally found some of what our Ministers and parliamentary party has done in support of the coalition difficult to support, I am not against coalition or compromise per se. In a professional capacity I have – outside of the UK – sometimes worked with curious coalitions that have nevertheless been effective.
However it is essential in such arrangements that individual parties make clear where their lines in the sand are, and I would have thought clean energy/low carbon development was such a clear LibDem line. Such a policy makes little sense though without a clear, declared decarbonisation target.
It will now be difficult for Lib Dems to maintain credibility on clean energy/climate change in the light of yesterday’s vote. For that reason I am surprised there were so few rebels on what one would have thought was an issue fundamental to Lib Dems (as well as being party policy, of course).
The parliamentary party has an important role to play in ensuring our Ministers defend LibDem priorities in government. And party members have an equally important role in ensuring the parliamentary party performs such a role.
While it is understandable for people to express their concerns on LDV (and elsewhere) at what our Government Ministers do in our name, it is also incumbent upon us all to ensure that the parliamentary party is properly held to account.
Well said, Eduardo. I make a guess that Ed Davey has done a deal with the Tories and he is not telling us what it is. You probably have experience of such things. I am still a novice about the mysteries of coalition governments.
Listening to Michael Fallon this morning, it would appear that Ed Davey’s deal involves making it more difficult for onshore wind farms to be developed.
What’s the point in having party policy when the parliamentary leadership whips against it? How can we hold them to account? Or do we not have democratic accountability in the Lib Dems? What has to change, conference policy or the leadership?