(2 weeks ago)
Lords Chamber
Baroness Curran (Lab)
I never thought I would ever find myself saying this, but I have listened to the noble Lord’s speeches on climate change and have had a very positive response to them. I think he makes very significant contributions on climate change and pay tribute to the work that he has done. I will reference the Jackdaw decision because I do not want to reference the Rosebank decision, but the Government are very clear that we are maintaining our commitment to get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster. It is entirely consistent with our commitment to building clean energy, and we remain committed to understanding and explaining to the British people the threat of climate change and the way that it will impact on their lives. It is happening now. We need to adapt, we need to mitigate now and we need to get off the fossil fuel roller coaster. I recognise the arguments that the noble Lord has put so well in this Chamber about that.
The Minister has kept saying, as have the Government, that this issue is quasi-judicial. Would she explain why? A judicial decision was made in the Scottish courts about a year ago. The duty of the Government is to make a factual decision, taking into account a judicial decision already made. That cannot be regarded as quasi-judicial.
Baroness Curran (Lab)
I answer the noble Lord with some degree of trepidation, because I know of his great expertise in this matter. My understanding is, and I have been told categorically by officials, that it is quasi-judicial because, given the range of factors that the Secretary of State has to take into account on this, it could be opened up to a court challenge. I am happy to further explore this matter so that in future I give a more adequate legal answer to the noble Lord.