Chlorofluorocarbons (Hansard, 20 July 1988)

§ 1. Mr. Faulds
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement outlining the Government's response to the recommendations from the Government-appointed ozone review group of scientists; and, in particular, if the Government support that group's recommendations for an 85 per cent. cut in the output of chlorofluorocarbon gases.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Colin Moynihan)
The Government will be studying the full report carefully as soon as it is available. In the meantime we have taken very careful note of the summary and its warning about the need to strengthen the Montreal protocol.

§ Mr. Faulds
For the first time in 23 years and four months I have question No. 1 on the Order Paper. I am delighted to ask the Minister whether he accepts that it is time that the Government realised that, despite their usual reluctance to take appropriate analysis and the necessary action, in the coming years—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] No. I want to get my facts and figures right. Some of us like to be precise in what we say and not as vague as the Treasury Bench usually is. In the coming years there must 1082 be an 85 per cent. cut in the output of chlorofluorocarbons just to stabilise the atmosphere. The Government really cannot daily dawdle any longer on this question.

§ Mr. Moynihan
The hon. Gentleman having question No. 1 on the Order Paper, it is indeed a glorious revolution.
The hon. Gentleman will know that it is vital to ensure that we bring the protocol into force and, first and foremost, get as many countries as possible to sign it. It is most important that there is flexibility within the protocol to ensure that we can look at new scientific data and take tougher measures if they are required. I take note of what the hon. Gentleman has said, and, as a result of additional scientific research, tougher action may be considered.

§ Mr. Stern
Does my hon. Friend agree that, rather than listening to the ritual kick at the chemical industry from the Labour party, he should encourage the industry to do the research to bring in the necessary products to replace chlorofluorocarbon gases? Will he take this opportunity to applaud the efforts of companies such as ISC in my constituency, which is trying to find such replacements, for the benefit of our people?

§ Mr. Moynihan
I recognise and applaud all those United Kingdom producers who are actively engaged in research and development work. It is essential that we give those companies time to test for the toxicity of the replacements. The Government have grant-aided a United Kingdom firm to develop a recovery and recycling process for the production of polyurethane foam.

§ Mrs. Ray Michie
Because of a lack of time the Minister was unable to respond to all the points raised in the debate the other night. Will he take this opportunity to tell us what his attitude is towards the so-called greenhouse effect, which will be caused by the depletion of the ozone layer? Does he believe the scientists who say that there will be tremendous problems in terms of food growth, diminishing water supplies, and so on? Does he take the matter seriously?

§ Mr. Moynihan
We certainly take seriously the scientific evidence on the greenhouse effect, but the hon. Lady will know that that covers a range of emissions, not just chlorofluorocarbons and halons. It is important that we consider the other emissions, which we are doing, not least through recent negotiations in the European Commission. I undertook to respond to all the points raised during the debate, and today I have cleared a four-page draft, which will be sent to all hon. Members who spoke in that debate.

Mr. John M. Taylor
If we are concerned about the upper atmosphere, can we not use our international influence to conserve the great rain forests from short-term privation? Will the Minister confirm that that is important?

§ Mr. Moynihan
That is important, and that is why the Overseas Development Administration is actively involved in projects to minimise the effects that have occurred as a result of the depletion of the rain forests. I welcome the ODA's initiative in that respect.

§ Mr. Allan Roberts
Does the Minister accept that we have only one ozone layer and that, if it goes, as the policy makers and scientists at the Toronto conference in June said, we could have been gambling with an unintended 1083 globally pervasive experiment, the ultimate consequences of which could be second only to a global nuclear war? We are talking about saving mankind from the destruction of the ozone layer. [Interruption.] We are certainly talking about recent significant increases in skin cancer, which have resulted from the depletion of the ozone layer. Why will the Government not accept the findings of their own appointed ozone review group of scientists, who say that an 85 per cent. reduction is needed? Will he confirm also that the Montreal protocol talked about a cut of only 35 per cent. in production and a 50 per cent. cut in consumption? Will he confirm also that we do not have to attack the chemical industry to want substitutes to be developed to replace CFCs?

§ Mr. Moynihan
The hon. Gentleman rightly points out that there is only one ozone layer. For that reason, it is important that the protocol has as many signatories as possible. To be too stringent and to lose major signatories, such as the Soviet Union, would be a great mistake. That is why it is essential, first, to get the protocol in place and then to ensure that within it there are review measures and appropriate machinery calling for more stringent measures when we need them. That is provided in the protocol.