The FOE statement follows a call to party leaders for determined action to tackle climate change. 

FOE wrote to the three biggest party leaders asking them to show that climate change is a priority in their manifestos and requesting confirmation of actions that will be taken.  The letter was signed by  over 8000 people. In addition FOE has asked candidate MP’s to sign a pledge to tackle climate change.

Detailed responses were sent by Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg who describes himself as a ‘hugh Friends of the Earth supporter’ and Labour’s Ed Miliband who committed to ‘putting climate change to the front and centre of everything Labour does’.

A short response from the Conservatives confirmed that Cameron was committed to the issues raised in the letter and looked forward to working with Friends of the Earth in the future.  Despite this letter a FOE spokesperson today pointed out that it’s the commitments of individual candidates that in many ways matter the most, given our parliamentary system. 

Talking about the climate change pledge the FOE spokesperson said “And that’s where the Conservatives are so lacking.  As the number of signers in the other main parties moves past three figures, in the Conservative Party it is just four“.

Cameron may well himself believe that environmental issues are important, however whether the message is getting through to his party is a cause for concern to FOE.  “Perhaps the message is that David Cameron must now redouble his efforts” say FOE.

FOE are encouraging people to contact David Cameron urging him to do more.

The ‘green hustings’ event organised by the Guardian featured a debate on climate change and energy between the 3 biggest political parties. The debate can be heard online via the Guardian website.

Opening Speeches

Ed Miliband kicked off by claiming credit for the UK becoming the world leader in offshore wind energy. He said the Labour party is however under no illusion as to the scale of the climate change challenge ahead.

Greg Clark opened by saying the leader of the Conservatives David Cameron had bought the issue of climate change to the forefront of politics and is continuing to do so. He said combating climate change requires more than just target setting.

Simon Hughes said that the Lib Dems have long understood the impacts of climate change and spoke of the inter-twined nature of both protecting our economy and our environment. He said the debate is broader than solely climate change and that the environment and climate change touch every part of our lives from the economy to defence.

Who would do the best job?

Labour’s Ed Miliband wants the UK to become a green industrial powerhouse and pointed to the announcements by 4 out of the 5 main offshore wind manufacturers that they are setting up shop in Britain. Labour also proposes to cut energy prices for the vulnerable and obligate private landlords to improve energy efficiency.

Greg Clark believes tough decisions need to be taken and if the Conservatives are elected to government there is an opportunity to leave behind the talk and to translate ambitions into real change over the next 5 years.

Huges said we are currently having to tackle an economic, environmental and political crisis and that we cannot solve one aspect of this crisis without solving the other.

The Lib Dems believe Labour and Conservative parties will continue to frustrate change by making short term decisions to please friends and associates. Hughes said people should have the courage of their conviction and vote for coherent economic and environmental policies for the next generation.

Climate Change Deniers

Both Ed Miliband and Simon Hughes believe that the Conservative party is unlikely to secure the backbench support required to meet renewable energy commitments. They repeatedly pointed to the climate change deniers within the party.

Nuclear Power

The Lib Dems do not believe nuclear power stations can be delivered in time before the energy crisis hits and that the nuclear programme undermines the building out of renewable energy. Ed Miliband however criticised Simon Hughes for his anti-nuclear stance. He argued that renewables would be increased sixfold if Labour were to be elected but that we need nuclear to fill the energy gap.

Onshore Wind Farms

Miliband argued with Greg Clark over whether wind farms should be consented locally or by central government. Miliband pointed to the raft of onshore wind farm applications refused by Conservative councils. Clark defended this by saying most onshore wind farm proposals were in Conservative controlled rural areas and that climate sceptics within the party are a ‘minority’.

The Figures on wind farm approvals released by the Department of Energy and Climate Change show that Conservative Councils approved 44.7 megawatts (MW) of onshore wind energy schemes whilst Labour Councils approved 68.3 MW. This is despite the Conservatives controlling the majority of rural Council areas where wind farms in England are usually proposed.

Conservative Councils refused nearly 160 MW of onshore wind energy schemes with Labour refusing 63MW.

John Sauven told the UK press that Conservative Councils need to be offered incentives to stop blocking wind energy developments.

He said “David Cameron could make a difference straight away by making a crystal-clear commitment that a Tory Britain would meet the target to generate 20% of our energy from renewables by 2020.”

According to Bob Neill – Shadow Planning Minister, the Conservatives would allow local politicians who have voiced premature opinions on planning applications the right to vote on the same applications.

The move – akin to allowing a jury member to voice a premature opinion before hearing all the evidence on a case, reverses historic moves by bodies such as the Nolan Committee to establish the basic principles of people serving the public. In the mid 1990’s the Nolan Committee was set up to review ministerial conduct further to claims of ’sleaze’ among Tory MPs. The Committee – later becoming The Commons Committee on Standards in Public Life – is the same committee now dealing with the MP’s expenses revelations.

The Nolan Committee’s First Report on Standards in Public Life recommended a code of conduct be introduced for local government officers and locally elected councillors. The Nolan committee established seven principles of public life – namely integrity, selflessness, honesty, accountability, openness, objectivity and leadership. These principles were to apply to all aspects of public life.

Shadow planning minister Bob Neill told the Royal Town Planning Institute conference last week: “We would scrap the pre-determination rule that at the moment means that if a member of a planning authority makes a comment on an application then they are then debarred from taking part in it. Most people outside our professional world think that is just potty.”

Councillors may well have a conflict of interest if they cannot view a planning application objectively and if this is the case it is unfair on whoever submitted the planning application if that councillor is allowed to take part in the decision as to whether it should go ahead.

If, for example you wanted to install solar panels on your listed building roof you would talk to the conservation officer at you local authority who may tell you that if you keep them to one half of the roof they will be acceptable. However your next door neighbour does not like the idea so tells his friend Councillor Robinson who, without seeing any of the plans openly speaks out against your solar energy project in the newspapers and is then allowed to vote on your application. Is this serving the public objectively or selflessly?

Neill also wants politicians to take the lead role in the planning process. Given that local politicians already decide local planning applications, it is not clear what additional powers he is contemplating…

The Conservatives argue that their policy paper is about more local control over decision making and funding. It proposes to keep National Policy Statements (NPS) which set out national policy on a range of subjects – including renewable energy policy. At the same time however they want to reduce the enforceability of these national statements by effectively saying local authorities can adhere to it if they feel like it.

Increasing local power and autonomy is often positive, however it also has its downside in that it leaves open a window for the “vocal local” (who does not necessarily represent the majority) to influence decisions that other people in the community do not have the time to be involved in. This often results in ill-informed decisions on for example wind energy projects, despite planning officers recommendations for approval.

The authority of the Planning Inspectorate – a professional organisation whose role is to ensure that national planning policy e.g. renewable energy policy is adhered to is diminished in the Conservatives proposals and regional level planning is to be abolished altogether. This means each region’s renewable energy target is abolished with it, leaving little pressure on local authorities to “do their bit” by allowing renewable energy projects.

Although local decision making and funding may on the surface sound good, it does leave a question as to how – without higher level decision making power – higher level national and regional objectives such as meeting our commitments to carbon dioxide reductions are to be achieved.

In a recent post I reflected on local decision making powers – using an example in Virginia about allowing the use of washing lines. This kind of debate, indecision and failure to grasp the bigger picture is not restricted to this town – it happens regularly in many places world-wide and until we solve this problem, higher level decision making is often necessary. Although we may not like it – until we become less selfish – some decisions are best taken at the national and regional levels – particularly when our future and the future of our children is at stake. More information on the policy is on the Conservatives website.