Farron and Davey attack Tories’ “systematic unravelling” of our commitment to tackle climate change

Tim Farron and Ed Davey have written to Davey’s Conservative successor as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Amber Rudd to challenge her on her record so far of undermining practically everything the Liberal Democrats brought to the table. They warn her that her actions jeopardise the UK’s chances of meeting legally binding climate change targets. Their full letter is published below:

We are writing to you regarding our concerns for the future of Britain’s renewable industries and our global leadership on climate change.

We are utterly appalled at the systematic unravelling of the renewables industries that is taking place under your leadership. We stand with business executives, trade associations and environmental NGOs and call for an end to this ideological assault on green energy which is economically nonsensical and is undermining Britain’s ability to push for a more ambitious global Climate Change Treaty at the UN in Paris this December.

Despite your statement in May this year that you planned to unleash a ‘solar revolution’, your department has enacted a series of devastating policies which make a mockery of this and will ultimately dismantle much of the work on green policy that the Liberal Democrats achieved in Government, costing thousands of jobs and jeopardising our economic future. Severe cuts to solar and wind subsidies, as well as ending the Green Deal and abolishing Zero Carbon Homes, together mean that progress towards tackling climate change is fundamentally undermined.

You have used two arguments to justify your actions. First, that the Levy Control Framework is overspent, and second, that you are trying to help consumers with their energy bills. You must know both arguments are bogus.

On the LCF budget, what has happened to the headroom contingency arrangements agreed in the Coalition of 20% above the agreed Levy Control Framework totals, in the event of lower wholesale gas prices which we now see? It is economic madness to cut long term investment in solar and wind, because of short term changes to international gas prices.

Second, the assumptions behind the LCF figures published to date are not transparent, and beg many questions such as the assumption made on project attrition. Because you are using these figures to try to justify the devastation being reaped on the UK renewables industry, we call on you to publish all the assumptions behind those figures. We are also calling for the DECC Select Committee and the Public Accounts Committee to hold an inquiry into the LCF figures you are using to justify this damage.

You also say you are concerned about consumers. Why then are you deliberately targeting cuts to onshore wind and solar energy, which are widely acknowledged to be the cheapest renewable electricity sources currently, and are both predicted to see large price falls in the future. If you remain, as you claim, committed to the Climate Change Act, meeting our legal obligations will cost consumers more, if you stop these two renewable technologies. In other words, your justification for cutting renewable energy investment is bogus.

Partly because of such concerns above, Liberal Democrat peers are tabling an amendment today on the Energy Bill which requires the Secretary of State to produce a report on how the Government will meet its climate change targets, including its obligations under the legally binding European Renewables Directive, which requires a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from EU countries by 20% by 2020. This amendment seeks to enhance existing reporting requirements on issues such as the Levy Control Framework and the impact of onshore wind investment on consumer bills, given the weakness of your arguments used to justify your policies to date.

Green policy under this Conservative Government is heading in entirely the wrong direction and has already damaged the UK’s credibility and leadership role on climate change ahead of the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris this December. Furthermore, why are we willing to increase tax breaks for oil and gas and maintain subsidies for nuclear power run by the French and Chinese whilst at the same time slashing subsidies for clean energy technologies like solar and wind where British firms are increasingly winning orders? This is not the level playing field for low carbon technologies the UK advocates abroad but politically-driven picking winners.

So we call upon you and your Government colleagues for immediate public assurances that the UK still intends to meet our legally binding climate change and renewable energy targets, and to set out in detail how you will in practice do that.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

9 Comments

  • PHIL THOMAS 21st Oct '15 - 1:31pm

    Cant they do better than this ? Negative campaigning is what lost the Lib Dems dozens of seats. Need to be positive for a change ?

  • PHIL THOMAS 21st Oct '15 - 2:36pm

    Read what Cllr Danny Unwin from Wells is saying in the local papers as he has announced today that he is defecting to the Tories ?

  • PHIL THOMAS 21st Oct '15 - 4:46pm

    The motion was proposed by the Leader of the Tories. Cllr Unwin is obviously adaptable and wants to work with other Parties. He is fed up of the infighting and negative politics of his former Party.I’m afraid Tim Farron was wrong about defectors from Labour in their droves. The complete opposite seems to be happening ?

  • Neil Sandison 23rd Oct '15 - 11:41pm

    This article needs to go out on Facebook ect so we can circulate more widely .

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarBrian Ellis 11th Aug - 9:50pm
    An excellent article. I have voted. But I have to say that some of the comments made by supporters of both candidates caused me some...
  • User AvatarPeter j bodiam 11th Aug - 8:54pm
    if we built houses for rent and then charged a percentage of a person's income as the rent then if a person was out of...
  • User AvatarDavid Raw 11th Aug - 8:42pm
    @ Michael BG " The party after 1918 was very anti-socialist,............. Not that surprising given nearly forty one time radical Liberal MP's joined the Labour...
  • User AvatarKatharine Pindar 11th Aug - 8:40pm
    It's interesting to wonder where most Lib Dems fit in the freedom vs. equality debate. Clive Lewis, the Labour MP who gave the recent Beveridge...
  • User AvatarDavid Raw 11th Aug - 8:22pm
    @ Michael BG It might have been all so very different if ............ The Liberal mine owners and shopkeepers of Lanarkshire had adopted a former...
  • User AvatarRichard Easter 11th Aug - 8:14pm
    With 60,000 dead, unemployment rising and the possible long term implications of the virus not fully understood, it is quite mental that all the fury...