Letter to MP’s: Lobby the Government to Modify Climate Change Act Targets

Posted: March 25, 2013 by tallbloke in government, Natural Variation, Politics

Following a good bit of legislation sleuthing by Roger Andrews, Talkshop contributor ‘mitigatedsceptic’ has written this sensibly pitched letter to his MP and offered it for general use. You can do this very easily at They Work For You, a website which enables you to send communications to your MP with a few mouse clicks. Please consider doing this.  As ‘mitigatedsceptic’ says, with the fuel crisis and cold weather in the news, now is the moment.

mitigatedsceptic says:

TB and Roger A., thanks to you I was able to write to my MP, who is also a Cabinet Minister, in the following terms. I am sure that this could be much improved upon and I hope that others following this thread will do just that and write to their MPs right away while the snow is bringing the country to a standstill and many elderly and infirm are at serious risk. A response by Gov’t now might reduce the risks of power cuts and save many lives.



I understand that the Climate Change Act permits the Minister to alter the emissions target in the light of new scientific evidence. It is not necessary for Parliament to repeal the Act in order to relieve the energy crisis. The Introductory Text reads:

1 (1) It is the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 80% lower than the 1990 baseline.
2 (1) (a) The Secretary of State may by order amend the percentage specified in section 1(1);
2 (2) (a) if it appears to the Secretary of State that there have been significant developments in scientific knowledge about climate change.

Surely fifteen years of zero warming and the coldest March, since goodness knows when, is evidence enough to justify relaxing the burden of this target, especially as we face an energy crisis caused almost entirely by efforts to meet it? Remember, if the evidence changes to show that warming is still on the cards, it will be possible increase the target again. This seems a much more flexible policy than rescinding the CCA altogether and it would placate the concerns of those who have invested so much in trying to reduce emissions.

Please put it to Cabinet that here is an opportunity to recover the public’s lost confidence in the policy about climate change and to show that Government is capable of taking the right decisions in the light of changing circumstances.

This would allow the immediate salvation of major coal-fired power stations from closure and a cut in the rate of energy price rises. It would also emancipate us from the risks associated with importing so much energy from overseas and help the Balance of Payments substantially. Affordable and secure energy supplies are at the heart of economic recovery and can save millions from the fuel poverty presently threatening them.

This is the right moment, in the midst of a deep freeze in March, to make this statesman-like move. Please do not miss it!


  1. Filbert Cobb says:

    I’ll tell you when goodness knows when was: 22 March 1947 when I emerged from my mother in St Giles’ Hospital on Denmark Hill, looked out of the window to see a blizzard and called the midwife to put me back in there where it was warm an’ cosy and food wasn’t rationed.

    Much as I like the template letter I think it drifts a bit close to “weather is climate”, so I’ll customise it a tad before use.

  2. David ashton says:

    I was born on the 23rd March 1947, and was lucky to survive. My mother had severe birth complications and had to be rushed to an acute hospital in an ambulance which had to navigate through drifts >5ft deep.

  3. tallbloke says:

    David A: Glad you’re with us to tell the tale. Hmmm, 1947+66 for the AMO cycle. That’d be about right then.

  4. Roger Andrews says:

    I just stumbled across another interesting document.


    Here’s the gist:

    “Labour’s Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband has committed the UK to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 80% on 1990 levels by 2050 as a major contribution to a global deal on climate change.

    “Why have Labour raised the target to 80%?

    “The original 60 per cent target included in the Climate Change Bill was based on a Royal Commission report in 2000, which said that we needed to cut emissions 60 per cent cut by 2050. Since then, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports have found that –

    o Arctic sea ice has melted faster than expected.
    o Emissions from other countries have grown faster.
    o The impacts of each degree of climate change are known to be worse.”

    If these three specific claims can be debunked or shown to be irrelevant, which shouldn’t be too hard, then the 2050 target would presumably have to be rolled back to 60%.