§ Mr. CohenTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those applications for which Her Majesty's Government considers chlorofluorocarbons are still needed and where substitutes are not yet available; when it is expected that each such CFC-producing application can be phased out; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. BaldryCFCs are still needed for some refrigeration, air conditioning and solvent applications, and for certain foams and medical aerosol products. The Government have proposed a 1996 phase-out for supply of new CFCs, except for any essential uses for which the Montreal protocol parties agree that alternatives are not available at that time.
§ Mr. SumbergTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek an emergency meeting of the Montreal protocol so that an immediate ban on all ozone-depleting chemicals can be introduced.
§ Ms. PrimaroloTo ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will ask for an emergency meeting of the Montreal protocol to discuss the recent data on the Arctic and northern hemisphere ozone hole; and if he will make a statement on his Department's policy on ozone-depleting substances.
§ Mr. TrippierThe Montreal protocol parties are already due to meet in November this year and will consider whether the controls on ozone-depleting substances should be tightened. Official level negotiations begin on 6 April. I proposed to the EC Environment Council last December that the protocol's phase-out dates be brought forward to 1995 for halons and 1996 for other ozone-depleting substances, an acceleration ranging from four to nine years. As far as I am aware, the United Kingdom is so far the only country to have made firm proposals to strengthen the protocol. An immediate CFC phase-out is not practicable—for many applications, such as food preservation, insulating foam and medical aerosols, replacement technologies are not yet adequately developed.