Speeches by Reader.

“Rachel, you have managed to answer some of my questions ahead, so we might get some time back. I want to talk about Santa Marta. You have talked about it a bit, but what have you learned from our participation in that first global summit that we can apply going forward?”

“Are we better placed to make change through a coalition like that than the broader UNFCCC?”

“You talked about positive signals from Government. Are you seeing positive signals from investors in the market as well? A few years ago the chief executive of BlackRock said it is greed or nothing, essentially. Is that still the sentiment now, still the strong signal of five years?”

“Investment flexibility, and batteries and EV are the prime example, increases our exposure to Chinese technologies and Chinese influence on our energy market. In terms of energy security, which is what our Committee looks at as well as the drive to net zero, is the drive on flexibility, more batteries, this flooding of…”

“Scott, you are nodding.”

“As I have a time limit and have not yet asked the questions on my page, I will move on to them now, as I have some on grid investment.”

“We heard some really interesting evidence about how coalitions of the willing can make a big difference. This is a question to all of you, but starting with Richard: does the Santa Marta summit on the phasing out of fossil fuels signal a new era in international climate negotiation?”

“As an MP who represents a constituency at the heart of the golden triangle, with one in five of my constituents working in logistics, this issue comes up regularly, including most recently with Steve Deveraux from BSI Transport, who explained to me the costs and the red tape that the current entry system creates. Will …”

“Matt, how can its outcomes feed into the more formal UNFCCC process at COP31 and beyond?”

“Ana, a final question to you. A problem with the COPs is that they are too far removed from people’s everyday experiences. Will the agreements from Santa Marta have a more direct impact on people’s lives?”

“Does the operator perhaps have the wrong horizon it is looking to? It is looking to how we solve energy bills long term, 10, 15, 20 years ahead. We are concerned with how we sort people’s bills out in the next two years.”

“Any idea of the level of cost it would be to move to a 15 or a five?”

“Rachel, you have managed to answer some of my questions ahead, so we might get some time back. I want to talk about Santa Marta. You have talked about it a bit, but what have you learned from our participation in that first global summit that we can apply going forward?”

“Matt, do you want to come in? I have got a minute, so you have the last word.”

“Is there a risk that you create two groups, the coalition that are willing and working and the others, or is the hope that you create some FOMO, so that they want to come and join you at some point? How do you make sure that you do bring everyone on this journey? We cannot do it without every single country being invol…”

“We heard some really interesting evidence about how coalitions of the willing can make a big difference. This is a question to all of you, but starting with Richard: does the Santa Marta summit on the phasing out of fossil fuels signal a new era in international climate negotiation?”

“Ana, a final question to you. A problem with the COPs is that they are too far removed from people’s everyday experiences. Will the agreements from Santa Marta have a more direct impact on people’s lives?”

“On storytelling, the everyday person would generally see COP as rich people and leaders of the world travelling by private jet, staying in five-star hotels to talk about us all having to turn on our washing machines in the middle of the night and get rid of our petrol cars. Are we telling the right stories about these …”

“Alastair, Great Britain’s imbalance settlement period remains at 30 minutes. The EU is moving to 15. Australia is moving to five minutes. Should it be shortened and if so to what length?”

“Lawrence, a witness has argued that no further wind generation should be built in Scotland until transmission constraints to England are addressed. Do you agree?”