Peter Ainsworth is no longer an MP, he’s a founder member of the ‘Robertsridge Group‘, an environmental and sustainability consultancy. He is chair of wild flora charity Plantlife. He’s also a board member of the environment agency, a government funded quango, which says of itself:
We are an Executive Non-departmental Public Body responsible to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and a Welsh Government Sponsored Body responsible to the Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development.
Our principal aims are to protect and improve the environment, and to promote sustainable development. We play a central role in delivering the environmental priorities of central government and the Welsh Government through our functions and roles.
So his private consultancy is in a good position to benefit from his publicly paid for role with the EA.
What was he saying about climate change as shadow environment minister back in 2006? Read on…
Peter Ainsworth East Surrey, Conservative,
Shadow Secretary of State for Environment
1: It is the greatest challenge facing our generation.
2: We must start by cutting our own emissions. A Climate Change Bill would help this. We need Government to lead by example, cutting its own energy use, converting to renewable energy sources, and using its enormous buying power to foster non-polluting technologies. Then we need long-term policies to create a framework for a shift to a low carbon economy. Only once we have put our own house in order, will we have the moral authority to lead an international effort to achieve a fair, robust, global system for tackling climate change. In the end, hard though it will be to secure, there must be a global agreement.
3: I have committed to cutting personal carbon emissions by 25% over 5 years; reducing car use, installing energy efficient light bulbs and other low carbon products, avoiding flying, switching off electrical appliances when not in use, converting to a renewable electricity supplier, recycling and composting waste.
Speaking in March 2006, Ainsworth set out the possible new direction for Conservative policy stating that “Achieving a sustainable world and combating the threat of climate change will require some really fresh ideas and radical thinking. We cannot expect to meet the challenges of this century by toying with the structures and technologies we have inherited from the past, and the concept of Decentralised Energy should to be taken seriously.”[5] Ainsworth was notable as the only member of the shadow cabinet to have voted against the war in Iraq.
I wonder how he got on with reducing his personal carbon emissions by 25% over 5 years.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
He should read the Sunday papers…carbon emissions are in the news again – for being vastly over-rated.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301757/Governments-climate-watchdog-launches-astonishing-attack-Mail-Sunday–revealing-global-warming-science-wrong.html
Davey: “Climate change is the most important issue facing us today”
Clegg: “(C)limate change is one of the greatest problems we face today.”
Ainsworth: “(Climate change) is the greatest challenge facing our generation.”
DEFRA, Climate change: The UK programme 2006: “(C)limate change is the greatest long-term challenge facing the world today.”
http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4000
Roger Andrews. Nice summary list.
It’s a pity they can’t be more honest and call it Global Warming, which is what they really mean.
Otherwise when the climate gets a whole lot colder as it eventually will they can say that that’s what they were referring to and they right all along.
That assumes the putative Landscheidt minimum does turn out to be a significant drop in temperatures.
As long as we don’t have to wait 500 years for the big one instead.
Personally, I don’t need to be told to reduce my Carbon Emissions and it’s disturbingly ironic that I now pay more for energy, I’m an Electrical engineer and my home is highly efficient and has been even before all these anthropogenic climate change alarmists were elected to create laws over me, I’m also a qualified horticulturalist and I have given 2 years of my free time volunteering for a conservation group (FYI funded by Shell Oil) while I earned it, planting thousands of trees, picking up litter, building projects that encouraging nesting grounds and speaking in primary schools on how important the environment is. I also never drive as I’ve never had an interest in it.
I’m also a computer maintenance and networks engineer and programer qualified 19+ years ago, Now I’m Studying Science and Astronomy with a huge interest in solar physics and I’m thinking about doing a degree sometime in the future.
So, what do you think I think about your opinion on Anthropogenic Climate Change? Mr. wasteful politician?
I think I’m finally getting to the bottom of all this, and it’s not good.
The UK Climate Change Act of 2008 was orchestrated – and largely authored by – Friends of the Earth.
That’s right. FRIENDS OF THE EARTH.
Time, I think, to don your peasant smocks, pick up your pitchforks and flaming brands and march on Westminster.
Details tomorrow if anyone’s interested.
Give us the gory details Roger A. We’ve been too busy studying the science to notice the sneaky political manoeuverings.
The “although Britain only emits 2% of global emissions” line occurs no less than 26 times in the file I’ve assembled.
Roger Andrews. Interested ? You have my undivided attention.
Tallbloke. Isn’t 2% out of date by now ? Aren’t we down to about 1.5% and closing steadily on 1% ?
So if the entire population of the UK wakes up dead one morning, then World temperatures will go down by an unmeasurable amount. Why are nearly all our members of parliament so completely stupid.
Here’s a brief potted history, naming names. I haven’t provided links to avoid cluttering things up, but anyone who wants to do a web search won’t find the paper trail hard to follow.
UK climate change legislation began with the UK Climate Change Programme, launched in November 2000, the goal of which was basically to make sure the UK met its Kyoto commitments. Having made a good deal at Kyoto, however, the UK was going to have no problem meeting these commitments while carrying on business as usual, so no emissions cuts were necessary.
Unless, of course, one wants to save the planet.
Fast forward now to 2005. Here’s how Friends of the Earth (FOE) saw things at the time:
“It was becoming increasingly apparent that Government efforts to tackle climate change were failing. Despite two (and eventually three) manifesto pledges to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent (of 1990 levels) by 2010, and commitments for a 60% cut by 2050, since 2003 emissions have actually been higher than when Labour came to power in 1997”.
So what did FOE do? First they introduced legislation:
“Following discussions between Friends of the Earth, former Conservative Environment Minister John Gummer, former Labour Environment Minister Michael Meacher and then Lib Dem Environment spokesman Norman Baker, a Presentation Bill is introduced to Parliament by the three MPs, setting out a Bill to combat climate change by setting annual targets for the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions until 2050.” (The bill was presented on 13 July 2005 by Mr Michael Meacher, supported by Mr Tim Yeo, Norman Baker, Mr John Gummer, Robert Key, Vera Baird, Joan Ruddock, Emily Thornberry, Tony Lloyd, Andrew George, Mr Martin Horwood and Mr Mike Weir.)
And there seems to be little doubt that FOE wrote the bill (“drafted by Friends of the Earth”, says Wikipedia). However, it never came to a vote because Parliament was dissolved before the 2005 election.
Second, FOE mounted a publicity blitz:
“(W)ith long-term targets neither meeting the scientific need, nor focussing the minds of politicians, Friends of the Earth decided to launch The “Big Ask” campaign for new legislation that would require the Government to cut emissions every year by three per cent, to ensure the UK lives within its share of the global limit.”
What was the “Big Ask” campaign?
“The Big Ask ….campaign …. (called) for a new climate change law in the United Kingdom and 15 other EU member states …. 130,000 people across the country …. asked their MP to support such a bill. Radiohead frontman Thom Yorke was a spokesperson for the campaign.”
Big Ask was so successful that “Shortly after the 2005 general election, 412 of the 646 Members of Parliament signed an early day motion calling for a Climate Change Bill to be introduced, to include a requirement for 3% annual cuts in carbon emissions.”
The United Kingdom Government then announced the introduction of the Climate Change Bill in the Queen’s Speech on November 15, 2006. FOE was ecstatic: “We did it! In the Queen’s Speech on November 15th (2006) the Government announced its intention to introduce a Climate Change Bill. This is a massive success for Friends of the Earth’s Big Ask campaign. We couldn’t have done it without the thousands and thousands of people who contacted their MP to ask for just such a Bill – if you were one of those people, thank you!”
Ed Miliband, speaking during the Bill’s third reading in the House of Commons, was no less enthusiastic: “I end by paying tribute…to those who saw the dangers of climate change and the actions that needed to be taken long before the politicians did. I pay tribute to the scientists who detected the problem, the campaigners who fought to bring it to public attention, the green movement that mobilised for change, and above all, the members of the public who wrote to us in record numbers, asking for a Bill that met the scale of the challenge.”
So there you have it. Incidentally, “the scientists who detected the problem” included David King, Nicholas Stern and Stern’s scientific advisors Brian Hoskins and Julia Slingo.
Roger A: Excellent work. Did you get the file I emailed you last night?
Roger A,
Interesting material.
Baroness Blackout of Darkness was largely responsible for framing the CCA as described by Booker.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9416805/MPs-have-no-idea-what-the-Climate-Change-Act-means.html
It’s incredible that a far reaching policy such as this was cooked up by dreamers and activists and it went through the Commons without anyone much asking questions about how practical it was or what the costs and consequences would be.
Yup, I got it. Amazing how hundreds of MPs from all sides of the political spectrum all say the same thing.
But where did they get it from? Well, presumably they all signed Early Day Motion 178, which reads like this:
“That this House agrees with the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser that climate change is a threat to civilisation; welcomes the cross-party agreement in favour of major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, and particularly in carbon dioxide emissions, by 2050; believes that such a long-term target will best be met through a series of more regular milestones; and therefore notes the Climate Change Bill that was presented by a cross-party group of honourable Members in the final days before the General Election, and hopes that such a Bill will be brought forward in this Parliament so that annual cuts in carbon dioxide emissions of 3 per cent. can be delivered in a framework that includes regular reporting and new scrutiny and corrective processes.”
And who wrote EDM 178? Undoubtedly Friends of the Earth (who admit, incidentally, that they wrote the 2005 Climate Change Bill). EDM 178 was introduced on 24 May 2005, about six weeks after the Climate bill, and it was sponsored by the same honourable members who in collusion with FOE had introduced the Climate Bill (Meacher, Baker, Gummer).
Cosmic:
“It’s incredible that a far reaching policy such as this was cooked up by dreamers and activists and it went through the Commons without anyone much asking questions about how practical it was or what the costs and consequences would be.”
Well, I think some people did. The problem was the questions were answered by King, who insisted that CAGW doomsday was upon us, and by Stern, who insisted that the problem could be fixed on the cheap.
Other motivations seem to have been a) the desire to make a splash when the UK assumed the presidency of the EU in 2005 and b) the somewhat naive idea that by “taking the lead” in cutting emissions the UK could induce the US to follow suit.
And the impacts of misguided climate legislation get more serious by the minute:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/entire-troupe-of-300-circus-fleas-killed-by-freezing-weather-in-germany-8555528.html
Roger A,
The only note of caution I’d add is seeing FoE as operating Rasputin-like in gaining control of the levers of power. They may have been clever at it, but they were operating in a wider backdrop prepared by New Scientist, the BBC and others.
Around 2005 when Cameron went off to hug the glacier, this stuff was popular with the voters. The hideous costs and consequences were only dimly glimpsed.
Roger Andrews, that makes sense and a bit disturbing!
Cosmic:
Right, there was nothing Machiavellian about it. I guess allowing FOE to draft legislation even qualifies as democracy provided it’s supported by enough elected representatives. But now things are beginning to fall apart it might be helpful to let the public know who got them into this mess in the first place.
Sparks:
Indeed.
TB, if you’re still there. The archive you sent me contains the following gem:
David Chaytor, Bury North, Labour: “(Climate change is) the most difficult challenge that Governments have faced since the dinosaurs roamed the earth.”
🙂
Roger A:
Flintstones democracy:
“kindly address the chair”
“But it’s a rock”
“Well, call it a chair”
“Why not call it a rock?”
~Douglas Adams~
Since the earth is clearly doomed we should now make plans to send the politicians and environmentalists off on a spaceship to populate another planet.
Followed, of course, by another spaceship containing the useful members of society.