Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 19 December 2018

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action

Examination of the Third Report of the Citizens' Assembly (Resumed)

12:00 pm

Lord Deben:

In the UK, we are faced with health advice that suggests we reduce the volume of meat we eat dramatically, and much more than is necessary for climate change reasons. We have not, therefore, found ourselves in the position we would otherwise have found ourselves. We are talking about cuts of between 25% and 50% in the meat industry but the health people are talking about much more. We are at the beginning of a process and we are finding considerable support among farmers who want to do that and who want a higher price for well-produced meat. We all eat much more than we need and we could spend the same amount buying the volume of meat we want. Some restaurants mix up quality and quantity but in the best restaurants, the quantity is not great while the quality is particularly good. This can be managed.

Most people are bored to the back teeth with most things related to climate change and it is not the big issue they want to talk about, though they believe in it and they notice that the rain comes down in a different way, that spring comes earlier and that the weather is different. My view is that we should talk about it in other contexts. For example, the Royal Botanic Garden in Edinburgh is going to point out to the vast number of people who go around the garden to look at the specimen trees that the trees have come out 17 days earlier than they used to, which is because the bees do not come out at the same time. At the point at which somebody is interested in something, one should tell them about it. The Forestry Commission has agreed that it will do the same thing in its forests and will tell people that it is planting different trees because of climate change. We are pressing for news bulletins to mention climate change in the context of the stories they are reporting. It may be controversial to say this, but I believe it is important to get the same reaction to leaving out the climate change aspect of a report as one would get to leaving out the sexist angle to a story. There is a terrible row when news bulletins do not recognise the part women play in society and women and their supporters spend a lot of time getting back at broadcasters and newspapers to make sure they do not make such omissions. We have to do the same with climate change and make sure that people cannot ignore it. At long last, the BBC has started to treat it seriously but we have had awful trouble in the past. I was, for the first time as chairman of the climate change committee, asked to comment on the COP meeting in Poland recently.

I did not have some lunatic Lord Lawson sitting there telling me about a science he did not understand. The conference accepted that this was a proper conversation, and we then had a proper conversation about how well COP had done and what it had missed.

There has been a change, which we must keep going. My communication strategy is to ensure that the implications of climate change are talked about when other matters are being discussed. Take bottled water, for example. I hope everyone else does the same as me. If people offer me bottled water in a restaurant, I insist upon having tap water. Often, I politely explain why it seems to me to be barmy to do otherwise when our islands have perfectly good water. Therefore, if people want flat water, they should have it out of the tap. I do not know where the water in front of me is from, but I am sure it is out of the tap, which is as it should be. That is a small action, but it is what we have to do with everything - when an issue comes up, talk about it quietly. It is no good having a public campaign because that is not what people want to spend their leisure hours learning about. Rather, it is about inserting this matter into the conversation at the right points.