There's lots of things that I do understand about the climate change debate and, of course, a number (quite possibly a larger number) that I don't. One that really doesn't make sense to me at all is this idea of "mandatory" and "binding" emissions commitments:
The environment secretary, Hilary Benn, yesterday called on the US to agree to mandatory goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, warning that the alternative was dangerous climate change.
...
"The only way forward must involve developed countries taking on binding emissions commitments because a voluntary approach ... isn't going to do the job," he said. "And that means all of us, including the largest economy in the world, the United States - taking on binding reduction targets. It is inconceivable that dangerous climate change can be avoided without this happening."
Let us, for the moment, accept the entirety of the debate: even then what the fourth generation MP (and third generation Cabinet Minister...there's social mobility for you!) says is nonsense. Targets, whether binding, voluntary or mandatory are irrelevant. Within the terms of the debate what will avoid climate change is a reduction in said emissions. Not the posturing of politicians about them.
Even if we leave that aside there's still no sense in this "mandatory" idea. For who is the enforcing power? If a sovereign government some years in the future has allowed emissions to be above said target, what is anyone going to do? Invade? Impose trade sanctions? Wibble at an international meeting?
The plain fact is that whatever the words used, such targets are always going to be voluntary. So why quibble over those words?
Blogs: Martin Bright | Clive Davis | Alex Massie Melanie Phillips | Americano | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comment
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
A fatal crash for Porsche and Volkswagen?
Matthew Lynn 01/07/2009Does the Bank of England deserve more power?
Richard Northedge 24/06/2009Trying to pick winners is a losers’ game
Charlotte Moore 24/06/2009Like rabbits caught in the headlights
Scott Payton 24/06/2009
IF YOU ARE PLANNING A CHAMPAGNE RECEPTION and looking for some light entertainment, you can now hire London's busiest steel
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved