Speeches by Gardiner.

“Let me ask you to highlight the key lessons that you would wish to take out from CTAP and other trial relocation schemes that may have happened. What are the best options for supporting people through the loss of their property? Which ones would you want to see rolled out into a national programme? Can you briefly high…”

“That is a really interesting proposal. Can you identify who the class of beneficiaries would be that you are talking about?”

“I am seeing nodding across the board.”

“I believe that, in the Isle of Wight, you have now a whole postcode after the Ventnor—”

“That is very helpful. I want to move on to Mr Goodliffe. In Happisburgh I think you have had a relocation scheme that paid up to 40% of property prices there. How can those schemes be safeguarded against potential exploitation—people who might want to buy up land and properties they consider could be subject to these m…”

“Finally, the coastal erosion assistance grant to support safe demolition of at-risk properties is only available to those properties before 2009. Do you think that that cut-off date is still justified?”

“Thank you. I was confident you would, but you have to say it—I cannot say it—for us to incorporate it into the report.”

“Or should there be almost a moving cut-off date because, as you have pointed out, things change in this area? Areas that were previously deemed safe are no longer, so should there be flexibility on that?”

“Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that one of the most important things the Government can do at COP1 when it meets next year is to establish a regime with the other members of the conference of the parties on how enforcement of the new treaty will take place?”

“Does the Minister recognise that the policy costs mentioned by the shadow Minister are a regressive tax, and that it may be better to put those on to general taxation? Of course, the energy company obligations and other policy costs were introduced by the Conservative Government. Will the Minister give consideration to…”

“I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) on securing the debate and introducing it in the way she did. To misquote Bill Clinton, “It’s a limit, not a target, stupid!” The carbon budgets we set represent a threshold we should not breach, not a target we should aim for or just dip …”

“I am conscious of time and I just want to ask you one further thing. From what Mr Childs and you have said already in terms of SAF and in terms of transportation, I wonder if you feel that there is a danger that the CCC is now, instead of offering Government what it sees as the solutions to the scientific facts of clim…”

“In terms of an implementation timeline, you might just say, “Let us do everything as soon as possible,” but there are certain things that we cannot do until we have done other things. How do you see the phasing of it being managed by the Government?”

“Finally, can I finally apologise to you? There is a debate that is going to be starting in Westminster Hall on the delivery of the carbon budgets, which I intend to speak in, so I will be leaving early from the Committee. Thank you very much for your submissions.”

“It all comes out now.”

“I would like to object that nobody has asked me to be a vice-chair.”

“Professor Grubb, what are the implications of the the CCC offering only one pathway in its recommendations on carbon budget 7 rather than the multiple pathways that it previously looked at?”

“I want to look at the delivery plan and see how robust it is. If we look at the energy and emissions projections, they are expected to deliver over 100% of the emissions reductions to meet the carbon budgets 4 and 5, but only 75% of the savings needed for carbon budget 6. We have carbon budget 7 on top of that. How rea…”

“I trust you enjoyed this Committee’s report on SAF.”

“Thank you for that. The Climate Change Committee examined 163 of the plans for reducing emissions this summer, did it not? Fewer than half of them were considered to be fully credible, and over a third were considered to be either insufficient or to have significant risks of failure. You very elegantly, I thought, sub-…”