Climate Change: Government Action
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Whitehead (Lab)
The Government are completely guided by the science as far as climate change action is concerned. I share the noble Earl’s concern that in terms of the climate change debate in this country we appear to be moving away from the science—which is the underpinning of everything that we need to hold on for future action. The particular issue as far as retaining the science is concerned is continued support for and understanding of the work of the Committee on Climate Change and how it is interpreting the science to make sure that its recommendations are absolutely with the science. The noble Earl will know that the seventh carbon budget that has come from the Committee on Climate Change is up for consideration by the Government by the end of next month. That will underpin its work in this respect.
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, I am very grateful to the Minister for his Answer and for all that the Government are doing. In the light of the richly deserved tributes to Sir David Attenborough, what is the Government’s view on the role of public education and investment in public education around the climate emergency? Do they commend, for instance, the “People’s Emergency Briefing”, the new film which has been produced? Do they want to increase investment to rebuild the political consensus that we had some years ago that this is a national emergency?
Lord Whitehead (Lab)
Like the right reverend Prelate, I am very disappointed about the partial breakdown in the consensus that we had on the emergency that climate change represents in this country. It is this Government’s fervent wish that this consensus can be regained. We are already putting a lot of resources into various bodies which can ensure that climate change is discussed fairly and without bias in the public sphere, aiming to get that consensus back again as far as the public are concerned.
King’s Speech
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, it is always a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron. I look forward to the maiden speeches to come.
In the words of the King’s Speech,
“an increasingly dangerous and volatile world threatens the United Kingdom”.
The Government will respond “with strength” and in line with
“the British values of decency, tolerance and respect”.
Not all threats are visible, though all need an intentional response.
The potential of artificial intelligence is clear, but there is rising public concern about the risks and dangers, both present and future. There is concern about employment and jobs being displaced by technology—which is already registering in statistics—and in the aspirations of the young. There is concern about the toxic effects of social media on public discourse. Nearly 1 million children are in the mental health system and, according to a report by Smartphone Free Childhood, youth worklessness has doubled over the last 10 years. There is concern about public truth, abuse perpetrated through and by chatbots, and increasing violence against women and girls. There is concern about the proliferation of AI in warfare, and there is growing concern about the international competition to develop general AI and the lack of guardrails for technology companies.
There are some things on technology in the King’s Speech to welcome, each of which will require careful scrutiny in this Chamber. However, for me, there is a massive hole in the centre of government policy in the area of online safety and security and the relationship between government and technology companies. The best interests of our citizens are simply not being served by a small number of global companies pledged to generate revenue and meet the demands of their shareholders. We are seeing, and will see, an increasing distortion of human dignity and value in the interests of profit. I look forward very much to Pope Leo’s forthcoming encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, which will be on AI, to be published on Monday, and to your Lordships’ House exploring these issues in more depth on 5 June in the debate on human-centred AI, sponsored by the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Where in the gracious Speech is the legislative vehicle to deliver the urgent changes needed to the online safety regime? Where is the strategic approach to AI safety? Where is the careful balancing of ethics with innovation? Where are the laws binding development on superintelligent AI? Will the Minister please comment?
Finally, as the bishop of a diocese with over 280 schools, and which has two of our own MATs and is a partner in 22 further MATs, and on behalf of the Church of England, I welcome the proposed reforms of the special educational needs system. They align with the Church of England’s vision for education, centred on human dignity, belonging, inclusion and enabling every child to flourish, regardless of their needs or abilities. However, we need to pay much more attention to the ordering of the digital world our children will inhabit.
EV Strategy: (ECC Committee Report)
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(1 year, 9 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, I too warmly welcome this debate as a member of the committee that produced the report. I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, for her introduction to the debate and her very careful, wise and gracious—and patient—leadership of the committee in its first three years.
My experience of serving on the ECC Committee across the three years was that each of the challenges we addressed proved to be both more significant and more complex than we first appreciated. It was a tremendous learning curve. Each issue had multiple questions and problems associated with it and needed complex solutions. That was clearly the case with the EV report before the House today.
Some very good work has been done by the previous Government, manufacturers and local authorities, but much more needs to be done—and urgently—to keep this transition on track. I would highlight that need for urgency in the transition. As the noble Baroness, Lady Jones, has just said, the effects of climate change across the world are accelerating, as all of us in this Chamber recognise, often affecting those who have least, who are least resilient and whose emissions in the present and in the past have been lowest across the world.
Surface transport is the UK’s highest emitting sector, with passenger cars responsible for over half the sector’s emissions. The new Government surely need to do all they can to accelerate the transition, alongside the vital transition to renewable energy, so what do they intend to do? The Labour manifesto for the general election mentions three key steps: accelerating the rollout of charge points; restoring the phase-out date of 2030 for new cars with internal combustion engines; and supporting buyers of second-hand electric cars by standardising information—the second-hand car market is key and complex. These are welcome steps and I ask the Minister, as others have done, to say when we will see action on each of those points. However, as I am sure the Minister will recognise, and as the report makes clear, the steps are not enough by themselves, so I ask for a response and for action on two further areas.
The first, echoing other noble Lords, is to ask what the Government will do to ensure that the transition to EVs as part of the transition to net zero is a fair transition. I commend that word “fair” to the Government: it does not feature in this part of the manifesto. In particular, how will the Government ensure parity of pricing and taxation between those able to charge their EVs at home and those who need to use a commercial charging service? As has been said, 40% of the country will not have access to a home charging point. There is, at present, no viable solution to ensure parity, and I agree that our committee was not able to offer one, but it will need some radical and imaginative thinking. How will the Government address this key question of fairness?
Secondly, how will the Government lead and encourage the transition to EVs through better communication and co-ordination across government? The committee conducted its inquiry through a period when the Government were rowing back from previous commitments and sending very mixed messages to the markets, to manufacturers and to consumers. We are still waiting for a sense of how the new Government will respond in terms of encouragement, incentivisation, accurate information and co-ordination of policy goals and delivery. What task force or structures will the Government put in place to ensure this for the future? The transition to EVs is a potential revolution in our road transport, our economy and public health over the next decade. How will the Government rapidly recharge this sector into the future?