(5Â months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, it is worth saying that the chemical industryâunder pressure, indeed, as the noble Lord, Lord Redwood, saidâis still a very important manufacturing sector in this country. It pays good wages, has high employment and, perhaps more importantly, is particularly centred in the north-east, the north-west and central Scotland, so it adds to regional policy in this country.
It suffers from high energy costs. It has also suffered from regulatory affairs, particularly immediately post Brexit, when the then Government were completely clueless about the cost and timing of setting up UK REACH. The estimates of the industry at the time were that it would cost some ÂŁ10 billion to change from EU REACH to UK REACH within the timescales that were talked about. Thankfully, some degree of sanity then came along in terms of those dates. I note that the transitional compliance deadlines, which were originally supposed to take place in 2021, will finally take place in 2031, 10 years after originally expected.
(3Â years, 6Â months ago)
Lords ChamberI think it is important that the right advice is given. I start by saying that this is pretty ground-breaking, because the UK is the first country in the world to make occupational pension schemes consider, assess and report on the financial risks of climate change. In terms of what I would call âthe pushâ, we have consulted with the pensions industry and certainly think it is right that guidance is given. For example, my department has introduced guidance alongside the TCFD requirements to help pension schemes understand how to identify, manage and assess climate-related risks and opportunities.
My Lords, actually, I think we were second after New Zealand; we were the first in the G20. The Financial Conduct Authority recently surveyed TCFD returns and found weaknesses in two areas: data or metrics, and targets. These are key areas. How will the Government try to put that right? Secondly, will the Government move forward, as I think they have said they will, with external assuranceâin other words, auditâof those returns, to make sure that we banish greenwashing in this area?
The noble Lord makes a good point. He has pointed out a few issues that were in the initial outlines. He mentioned data, which is an issue. Metrics and the use of implied temperature risesâfor example, carbon offsetting and scenario planningâare definitely challenges that are being worked on domestically and internationally. As I said, we are the first country in the world to do this. It is good work, which needs to be built on.
(12Â years, 4Â months ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, for this debate and for a very good start-off to it, as well as for drawing my attention to this report, which I must admit that I had not read beforeâand that is clearly something I should have done. But, my goodness, how things have changed since 2005 when the report was written. Since then, being anti-EU has become fashionable; it has strong street credâit is the urban of today. If anything, the way in which the BBC reports European issues has actually gone in the opposite direction. As the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, said himself, UKIP coverage has been quite extraordinary. I congratulate UKIP and the noble Lord, as a former leader of the party, on what it has achieved with no Members of Parliament but a strong MEP contingent. It is an important political movement in the country which gets huge coverage. Most of it, until two or three months ago, was almost completely uncritical, unlike the coverage of us rather more boring traditional parties, which suffer all the things that are thrown at us for all the things that we try to do in government or, indeed, in opposition.
The report of the noble Lord, Lord Wilson, brings a number of things to our attention. It states that there is no intentional bias, but goes on to say that informal bias has been shown in the past. The important message from that is still true: the BBC and the media more generally tend to report in terms of extremes, in that it is either all in or all out, or that we need somehow to partially opt out rather than stay as we are or go completely. It also talks about over-simplification, giving some examples. One that I remember well is where it looks at the,
âdevelopment of a European defence capability being treated simply as a scheme for a âEuropean Armyââ.
We heard about that mainly in the tabloid and popular press, but the BBC covered it as well, and of course it was far from the truth. There are some other points that the report brings up, such as treating,
âFrance and Germany as shorthand for the rest of the EU and failing to recognise the increased diversity of opinion following enlargementâ.
That is an important one; it may not be so bad, but it is an area where we are still at risk.
One of the biggest areas since 2005, where the bias has been completely anti-European, is with regard to the euro crisis. Not only the Financial Times but the tabloid press and the BBC predicted constantly for about 12 months the break-up of the euro, although for me it was one of the most unlikely things that was going to happen. What has happened? Has the euro broken up? How many member states have left the euro? Two actually joined during that period. Did we hear a lot about that from the BBC? I do not remember hearing much about it. During the euro crisis, did the euro stop being the worldâs second reserve currency? I do not believe so. Is it still? It absolutely is. Did the exchange rate actually plummet so that it was worthless? No, in fact, I thinkâmy noble friend Lord Dykes will know better than Iâit actually went up in value by comparison, certainly with pound sterling at the time, although that has probably slightly adjusted to our benefit over the past few months. Did we hear much about Hungary, a non-euro member that had equal economic and financial difficulties and needed a European and IMF bailout? I do not remember a great deal of reporting about that either. Clearly, there was a euro crisis and there were a lot of problems in terms of the way that Europe made its decisions at the time. However, in terms of its reporting, the BBC was absolutely and totally biased in a negative way and caused much of the feeling about the rest of Europe that reflected on that.
There is another area of concern. I remember writing to the BBC programme âFeedbackâ some years ago, before I became a Member of this House, to complain that although I liked listening to the âToday in Parliamentâ programme, there was no European Parliament coverage. Of course, I realise that I could be criticised here because the European Parliament accounts for only 9% of our legislationâor 7%, I think my party leader would sayâbut there is very little reporting at all of the European Parliament, which is an important institution in terms of the laws that are made in this country, as I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, would agree.
I would also ask whether we expect to have a sceptical or âantiâ view of the international institutions of which we are a member. Is that something we should demand from the BBC? Have I heard a lot of criticism of NATO or a lot of bias against NATO? Have I heard anything on the BBC about removing ourselves from NATO? Should we actually come out of the UN? Should we have suitable âbalanceâ from the BBC in terms of withdrawal from the IMF? The most important issue, of course, which we confront not in England but in Scotland, is whether we should have had, over the past five to 10 years, equal balance from the BBC about Scotlandâs withdrawal from the United Kingdom. I absolutely think we should not have done, but that, although it is not the same, is a parallel and similar issue to the UKâs membership of the European Union.
I will conclude there. However, I was interested to see that John Humphrys of the âTodayâ programme added more fuel to the fire on this. He was slightly critical of the BBC but I was delighted that he was reported as saying that BBC staff were more likely to be liberal rather than conservative because they were the âbest and the brightestâ. I do not mean anything about my coalition colleagues by thatâthat was a small âlâ and a small âcââbut I would like to think that as liberals, which I am sure that many noble Lords in this Committee are in terms of international politics, we are the best and the brightest. The BBC should remain balanced, but I believe that, if anything, the balance over the past five years has been in the opposite direction.