Think Global. Act Local!

Saturday, 24 October 2009

Lack of ambitious leadership from Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Sent to Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Dear Ed

I commend you on your action that resulted in Ken Clarke retracting his statement about onshore wind farms.

I write to you now about Wednesday's vote on 10:10, which was heavily supported by all parties except Labour. The truth is that this vote was an important opportunity to receive global news coverage that shows that countries are ready to show leadership and act boldly at the Copenhagen talks in December. Instead, the opposite message is being sent.

Labour's action was not FAIR
We are personally committing to 10% cuts in 2010. Council, schools and business are all signing up, but the government that represents us with on match our commitment.

Labour’s action was not AMBITIOUS
The Labour party has already committed to a 12.5% cut by 2010-11. A 10% cut in 2010 would have been achievable and would have sent the message that the UK is being ambitious: an inspiration to the global community.

Labour’s action was not BINDING
The alternative motion that Labour proposed contained no binding targets. Only by continually demonstrating that we are not afraid to commit to binding targets that are necessary to fight climate change can we collectively make the progress that we need.

I have been following you on Twitter and at for some time, and I was reaching the conclusion that you would make a good future leader of the Labour party. However, the negative result from Wednesday's 10:10 opportunity has made me look much deeper, and I now find that you only have a moderate voting record on climate change.

Moderate is not ambitious. The world needs leaders who can free themselves from the perceived constraints of politics and economics to find new solutions to entrenched problems.

I have read your explanation of Labour's none-support for the 10:10 motion over at the Labour List site.

I feel that your response misses the critical objectives of the 10:10 motion, and that your response does not adequately explain your party’s position on this. I am now circulating messages widely to support the Liberal Democrats ( who spearheaded this motion, unanimously supported it, and have a very strong position on climate change.

Yours sincerely
Ian Elliott

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.