The following questions were
received from a member of the public:-
Andrew Moore (which the Chair
read out)
Thank you for
responding to my questions to your last meeting, and apologies that
once again I am unable to attend in person this time due to
business commitments that take me to Scotland. I would be
grateful if answers could be provided to the following questions
relating to the minutes of the previous meeting.
-
At the last meeting I asked whether the PDG would
amend planning guidance in favour food security, the natural
environment and beauty of Mid-Devon over conflicting solar and wind
proposals. The answer was that it was not within? the PDG's
remit. Can you please explain how it is that it is not within
the remit of the 'Planning ... Policy Development Group' to
develop planning policy, particularly when it comes to matters of
importance to the local community such as those
outlined?
2.
At the last meeting I examined reported
performance figures to discover that they had been changed.
Can you please explain why the historic CO2 figures cited in the
report presented to the last PDG meeting differ from those in the
Council's Climate Strategy? The significant differences are
in Transport (now 11% higher), Procurement (now 22% higher), and
Buildings (now 1% lower). How can the Strategy be trusted if
the baseline figures were so wrong?
- At the last meeting I asked whether the PDG
would commission a study to inform its strategy for the future in
the light of alternative views on the standard climate change
narrative. The answer was, in summary, a flat 'no'.
Apparently, 'independent advice' was sought. In line with the point
of my question, did that 'independent advice' include
alternative opinions to provide a balanced view of the response to
global warming? If not, the comment is not relevant. As
is the case for citing views from nearly two years ago. An
enquiring PDG, working on behalf of constituents, would be
interested in new information that might mean that policy should be
revised. It seems that this 'Policy Development Group',
having developed a policy once per its remit, is not going to stir
itself to do it again. So, here too, policy development does
not seem to be the active remit of a 'Policy Development
Group'. Bill Gates, a long-time climate change activist, has
recently called for a “strategic pivot” in the effort
against the climate crisis, writing that the world should shift
away from trying to limit rising temperatures to instead focusing
on efforts to prevent disease and poverty.
He has also criticized what he
described as a “doomsday view of climate change” which
focuses “too much on near-term emissions goals”.
So, once again, will this PDG open its eyes and commission a
balanced study to inform future strategy, considering whether use
of public money is being appropriately targeted, given many other
local priorities, in its recommendations to Cabinet and Full
Council?
The Chair explained that the
questions would be answered in writing within 10 working
days.