Oral question asked in the House of Commons, by Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat). It was answered on Thursday, 7 July 2005 on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (EU)

Question: The EU is definitely taking steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and I am sure that the EU states at Gleneagles will argue for a strong post-Kyoto regime as a way forward on the issue. We all want the US to sign up to such a regime. However, I suspect that the choice will be between a coalition of the willing, excluding the US, signing a strong agreement to tackle climate change, and an agreement watered down so far—so that the US can sign up to it—that it is almost meaningless. Which would she prefer?

Answer: What I would prefer is for the G8 to reach a consensus at Gleneagles on something that is strong enough. That will not, of course, satisfy those who have set high and ambitious goals—in some cases, perhaps, deliberately and in others through lack of understanding—that there is no prospect of the G8 talks securing. We are anxious to achieve three goals. First, we want an acceptance—whatever the precise wording or exact phrases people are prepared to sign up to—of the direction of travel and that this is a major and significant problem that requires urgent action. Secondly, we would like a plan of action to cut emissions, not just to set targets for cutting emissions, on which the G8 could agree. Thirdly, we would particularly like to achieve an agreement to have a forward dialogue about what we do after the first Kyoto commitment period, in which so far no one in the developed or developing world has yet been prepared to engage.

Secondary information