<?xml version='1.0' encoding='ISO-8859-1'?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [

<!ENTITY nbsp   "&#160;"> 
<!ENTITY iexcl  "&#161;"> 
<!ENTITY cent   "&#162;"> 
<!ENTITY pound  "&#163;"> 
<!ENTITY curren "&#164;"> 
<!ENTITY yen    "&#165;"> 
<!ENTITY brvbar "&#166;"> 
<!ENTITY sect   "&#167;"> 
<!ENTITY uml    "&#168;"> 
<!ENTITY copy   "&#169;"> 
<!ENTITY ordf   "&#170;"> 
<!ENTITY laquo  "&#171;"> 
<!ENTITY not    "&#172;"> 
<!ENTITY shy    "&#173;"> 
<!ENTITY reg    "&#174;"> 
<!ENTITY macr   "&#175;"> 
<!ENTITY deg    "&#176;"> 
<!ENTITY plusmn "&#177;"> 
<!ENTITY sup2   "&#178;"> 
<!ENTITY sup3   "&#179;"> 
<!ENTITY acute  "&#180;"> 
<!ENTITY micro  "&#181;"> 
<!ENTITY para   "&#182;"> 
<!ENTITY middot "&#183;"> 
<!ENTITY cedil  "&#184;"> 
<!ENTITY sup1   "&#185;"> 
<!ENTITY ordm   "&#186;"> 
<!ENTITY raquo  "&#187;"> 
<!ENTITY frac14 "&#188;"> 
<!ENTITY frac12 "&#189;"> 
<!ENTITY frac34 "&#190;"> 
<!ENTITY iquest "&#191;"> 
<!ENTITY Agrave "&#192;"> 
<!ENTITY Aacute "&#193;"> 
<!ENTITY Acirc  "&#194;"> 
<!ENTITY Atilde "&#195;"> 
<!ENTITY Auml   "&#196;"> 
<!ENTITY Aring  "&#197;"> 
<!ENTITY AElig  "&#198;"> 
<!ENTITY Ccedil "&#199;"> 
<!ENTITY Egrave "&#200;"> 
<!ENTITY Eacute "&#201;"> 
<!ENTITY Ecirc  "&#202;"> 
<!ENTITY Euml   "&#203;"> 
<!ENTITY Igrave "&#204;"> 
<!ENTITY Iacute "&#205;"> 
<!ENTITY Icirc  "&#206;"> 
<!ENTITY Iuml   "&#207;"> 
<!ENTITY ETH    "&#208;"> 
<!ENTITY Ntilde "&#209;"> 
<!ENTITY Ograve "&#210;"> 
<!ENTITY Oacute "&#211;"> 
<!ENTITY Ocirc  "&#212;"> 
<!ENTITY Otilde "&#213;"> 
<!ENTITY Ouml   "&#214;"> 
<!ENTITY times  "&#215;"> 
<!ENTITY Oslash "&#216;"> 
<!ENTITY Ugrave "&#217;"> 
<!ENTITY Uacute "&#218;"> 
<!ENTITY Ucirc  "&#219;"> 
<!ENTITY Uuml   "&#220;"> 
<!ENTITY Yacute "&#221;"> 
<!ENTITY THORN  "&#222;"> 
<!ENTITY szlig  "&#223;"> 
<!ENTITY agrave "&#224;"> 
<!ENTITY aacute "&#225;"> 
<!ENTITY acirc  "&#226;"> 
<!ENTITY atilde "&#227;"> 
<!ENTITY auml   "&#228;"> 
<!ENTITY aring  "&#229;"> 
<!ENTITY aelig  "&#230;"> 
<!ENTITY ccedil "&#231;"> 
<!ENTITY egrave "&#232;"> 
<!ENTITY eacute "&#233;"> 
<!ENTITY ecirc  "&#234;"> 
<!ENTITY euml   "&#235;"> 
<!ENTITY igrave "&#236;"> 
<!ENTITY iacute "&#237;"> 
<!ENTITY icirc  "&#238;"> 
<!ENTITY iuml   "&#239;"> 
<!ENTITY eth    "&#240;"> 
<!ENTITY ntilde "&#241;"> 
<!ENTITY ograve "&#242;"> 
<!ENTITY oacute "&#243;"> 
<!ENTITY ocirc  "&#244;"> 
<!ENTITY otilde "&#245;"> 
<!ENTITY ouml   "&#246;"> 
<!ENTITY divide "&#247;"> 
<!ENTITY oslash "&#248;"> 
<!ENTITY ugrave "&#249;"> 
<!ENTITY uacute "&#250;"> 
<!ENTITY ucirc  "&#251;"> 
<!ENTITY uuml   "&#252;"> 
<!ENTITY yacute "&#253;"> 
<!ENTITY thorn  "&#254;"> 
<!ENTITY yuml   "&#255;"> 
<!ENTITY bull     "&#8226;"> 
<!ENTITY hellip   "&#8230;"> 
<!ENTITY prime    "&#8242;"> 
<!ENTITY Prime    "&#8243;"> 
<!ENTITY oline    "&#8254;"> 
<!ENTITY frasl    "&#8260;"> 
<!ENTITY trade    "&#8482;"> 
<!ENTITY le       "&#8804;"> 
<!ENTITY ge       "&#8805;"> 
<!ENTITY amp     "&#38;#38;"> 
<!ENTITY lt      "&#38;#60;"> 
<!ENTITY gt      "&#62;"> 
<!ENTITY apos	 "&#39;"> 
<!ENTITY OElig   "&#338;"> 
<!ENTITY oelig   "&#339;">
<!ENTITY Scaron  "&#352;"> 
<!ENTITY scaron  "&#353;"> 
<!ENTITY Yuml    "&#376;"> 
<!ENTITY circ    "&#710;"> 
<!ENTITY tilde   "&#732;"> 
<!ENTITY ensp    "&#8194;"> 
<!ENTITY emsp    "&#8195;"> 
<!ENTITY thinsp  "&#8201;"> 
<!ENTITY zwnj    "&#8204;"> 
<!ENTITY zwj     "&#8205;"> 
<!ENTITY lrm     "&#8206;"> 
<!ENTITY rlm     "&#8207;"> 
<!ENTITY ndash   "&#8211;"> 
<!ENTITY mdash   "&#8212;"> 
<!ENTITY lsquo   "&#8216;"> 
<!ENTITY rsquo   "&#8217;"> 
<!ENTITY sbquo   "&#8218;"> 
<!ENTITY ldquo   "&#8220;"> 
<!ENTITY rdquo   "&#8221;"> 
<!ENTITY bdquo   "&#8222;"> 
<!ENTITY dagger  "&#8224;"> 
<!ENTITY Dagger  "&#8225;"> 
<!ENTITY permil  "&#8240;"> 
<!ENTITY lsaquo  "&#8249;"> 
<!ENTITY rsaquo  "&#8250;"> 
<!ENTITY euro   "&#8364;">  

]>
<rss version="2.0">






    



	<channel>
        <title>Liberal Democrats : Environment News Feed</title>
        <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment</link>
        <description>RSS News provided by Liberal Democrats</description>
        <language>en-gb</language>
        <pubDate>Sun, 7 Sep 2008 07:57:24 +0100</pubDate>
        <copyright>Copyright Liberal Democrats</copyright>
        <category>Liberal Democrats</category>
        <generator>In house</generator>
          
            <item>
                <title>Clegg: 'Apollo Project' to secure UK's energy</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14971</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Visiting an offshore energy farm in the North Sea today, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat 
leader, Nick Clegg&lt;/B&gt; will warn that Britain&amp;rsquo;s energy security is under severe 
threat as a result of the Government&amp;rsquo;s disintegrating energy policy, which will 
lead to an ever-increasing dependence on vulnerable foreign energy supplies. 
&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Setting out Liberal Democrat proposals to secure energy independence for 
Britain, &lt;B&gt;Nick Clegg &lt;/B&gt;will argue that politicians of all parties need to 
demonstrate the kind of vision, application and political will behind the Apollo 
Project that succeeded in putting man on the moon, in order to head off the 
threat to the security of our energy supply.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;B&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Nick Clegg&lt;/B&gt; 
said:&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;The Government has been looking at energy from the wrong end of 
the telescope.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;The scale of its failure to plan for Britain&amp;rsquo;s energy 
security has been brought into sharp relief by the Georgian crisis, which 
underlines the risks of increasing dependence on foreign energy sources as North 
Sea oil supplies run down.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;Rather than use its period in office to 
reduce Britain&amp;rsquo;s dependency on vulnerable supplies from unstable regions, Labour 
has dithered and flip-flopped for over a decade. Instead of an energy policy, we 
have a potential economic, environmental and national security disaster waiting 
to happen. &lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;But we have an enormous opportunity to create real energy 
independence for the UK, freeing ourselves from the shackles of foreign oil, 
coal and gas.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;Renewable energy is no longer a pipe-dream. It is 
realistic and achievable. All it requires is the leadership and vision that has 
been lacking under years of tired Labour thinking.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;That&amp;rsquo;s why today I am 
setting out Liberal Democrat proposals to become energy independent by 2050. 
This will require the kind of ambition and political will that succeeded in 
putting man on the moon. &lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;We need an &amp;lsquo;Apollo Project&amp;rsquo; for British energy 
independence.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&quot;Just as Britain invested in the North Sea in the 1970s to 
transform our energy prospects through oil production, we must today make 
similar investment in renewable technologies to harness Britain&amp;rsquo;s vast renewable 
energy resources, combined with major reductions in energy consumption.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;HR&gt;
To read the policy paper &lt;A class=&quot;&quot; 
href=&quot;http://www.libdems.org.uk/media/documents/Energy%20Independence%20for%20the%20UK.pdf&quot; 
target=_blank&gt;click here&lt;/A&gt;. 
&lt;HR&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Government squandering  42m renewables funding - Swinson</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14899</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;The Government has failed to spend any of the &#163;42m budget it has allocated 
for the development of wave and tidal energy technologies, figures obtained by 
the Liberal Democrats have revealed.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Parliamentary questions found that:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;DIR&gt;
&lt;DIR&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&#183; The entire &#163;42m budget for the Wave and Tidal-stream Energy Demonstration 
Scheme - the Government&amp;rsquo;s measure for allowing marine technologies to progress 
through their early phase - has remained unspent since it was announced in 
2004&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&#183; The associated &#163;2m budget for monitoring the environmental impacts of wave 
and tidal projects has also remained entirely unspent&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&#183; Only around one fifth (&#163;1.13m of a budget of &#163;5.64m) of the available 
budget for infrastructure support has been spent; none of the available funding 
has been spent over the past year (2007-08)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/DIR&gt;&lt;/DIR&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Commenting, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat MP Jo Swinson&lt;/B&gt;, who obtained the 
information through Parliamentary questions, said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;These figures show the yawning gulf between rhetoric and reality when it 
comes to this Government&amp;rsquo;s record on renewable energy.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Britain has world-leading potential when it comes to wave and tidal energy, 
yet the Government is sitting idly on the funding which the sector so 
desperately needs.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;How can the Government hope to meet its targets on renewable energy when it 
is not even capable of spending the modest funding it has set aside for wave and 
tidal technology?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This is a vital time for the development of the renewable energy industry. 
Instead of spending so much time pushing its nuclear energy agenda, the 
Government should be focussing on getting funding for renewable technologies to 
where it&amp;rsquo;s needed.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Mon, 4 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Absurd to choose between saving the planet and helping the fuel poor - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14897</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on reports that the Government is to announce that energy 
companies will be told to reallocate money spent on reducing carbon emissions to 
fuel poverty measures, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary, Steve 
Webb&lt;/B&gt; said: &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government is saying it is going to downgrade saving the planet because 
its priority is helping people struggling to pay their energy bills.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;It is absurd to suggest we must choose between the two.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Energy companies have benefited from a huge &#163;9bn windfall and they should be 
asked to sacrifice more.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;B&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on reports that the Government is to announce a &#163;500m &amp;lsquo;green tax&amp;rsquo; 
on energy companies to pay for extra winter fuel payments, raised by auctioning 
so-called &amp;lsquo;emissions permits&amp;rsquo;, Steve Webb added: &lt;/P&gt;&lt;/B&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government should have done this a long time ago.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Giving energy companies billions of pounds worth of free permits to pollute 
was a mistake in the first place.&quot; &lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Mon, 4 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Government woefully complacent on soaring energy prices - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14839</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on today&amp;rsquo;s Business and Enterprise Committee report, which warns 
that energy prices will rise significantly in the near future, with &amp;lsquo;serious 
consequences for millions of households, and especially the fuel-poor&amp;rsquo;, 
&lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary, Steve Webb&lt;/B&gt; said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government&amp;rsquo;s response to soaring energy prices has been woefully 
complacent. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The planned rise in the Winter Fuel Payment is dwarfed by the rise that 
households are likely to see in their bills. These increases hit the elderly and 
the most vulnerable the hardest, while energy companies receive a &#163;9bn windfall. 
&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Immediate action is needed so that vulnerable customers are guaranteed the 
best price that their supplier offers. Cuts in the warm front insulation 
programme must be reversed and the energy companies must be forced to drive up 
standards of home energy efficiency.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;For businesses, soaring fuel prices could be the straw that breaks the 
camel&amp;rsquo;s back. We need a competitive energy market so that businesses can shop 
around and get the best price.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Outrageous price hike will hit elderly and vulnerable hardest - Clegg</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14834</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on EDF Energy&amp;rsquo;s decision to raise its gas and electricity prices 
by 22% and 17% respectively, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg&lt;/B&gt; said: 
&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This outrageous price hike means that families could be made to pay an extra 
&#163;200 a year, having already endured increase after increase.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;When the winter comes this price rise will hit the elderly and the most 
vulnerable the hardest. The Government cannot sit idly by and allow them to 
suffer.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;When one company raises its prices the others soon follow suit. At a time 
when energy companies are enjoying a &#163;9bn windfall, it is unacceptable that they 
can continue to squeeze more profits out of people who are already 
struggling.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Outrageous price hike will hit elderly and vulnerable hardest - Clegg</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14831</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on EDF Energy&amp;rsquo;s decision to raise its gas and electricity prices 
by 22% and 17% respectively, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg&lt;/B&gt; said: 
&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This outrageous price hike means that families could be made to pay an extra 
&#163;200 a year, having already endured increase after increase.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;When the winter comes this price rise will hit the elderly and the most 
vulnerable the hardest. The Government cannot sit idly by and allow them to 
suffer.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;When one company raises its prices the others soon follow suit. At a time 
when energy companies are enjoying a &#163;9bn windfall, it is unacceptable that they 
can continue to squeeze more profits out of people who are already 
struggling.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Government has abandoned common sense over nuclear power plans - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14804</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on today&amp;rsquo;s publication of the Government&amp;rsquo;s siting assessment for 
new nuclear power stations, which says that they could be built in areas at risk 
from flooding, tsunami and erosion, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment 
Secretary, Steve Webb&lt;/B&gt; said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government appears to have abandoned common sense when it comes to new 
nuclear power. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Ministers are so desperate to get new nuclear plants going, they are willing 
to look at sites at risk of falling into the sea.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This irresponsible approach has all the hallmarks of a Government in a 
hurry.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;They are sweeping aside any local accountability in the planning system, and 
now they are willing to consider nuclear plants even in areas at risk of storm 
surge, tsunami and coastal erosion.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Ghost flights are disgraceful - Baker</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14761</link>
                <description>
&lt;P align=left&gt;&lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker 
&lt;/B&gt;today challenged Gordon Brown to take action against airlines that run 
so-called &amp;lsquo;ghost flights&amp;rsquo;, in which they fly short-haul trips with near-empty 
aircraft in order to preserve their take-off and landing slots.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;B&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Norman Baker &lt;/B&gt;said: &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;It is disgraceful that these environmentally damaging ghost flights are 
taking place. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;I welcome Gordon Brown&amp;rsquo;s admission that these flights are unacceptable and 
his promise to look into the problem.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;However, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Will he take action 
or will he continue to cave in to the aviation industry?&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Heathrow third runway consultation is a sham - Baker</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14705</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on John Hutton&amp;rsquo;s statement that &quot;we need a third runway at 
Heathrow&quot;, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker 
&lt;/B&gt;said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;John Hutton has let slip what we knew all along: the consultation on a third 
runway at Heathrow is a sham. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government decided a long time ago that it wanted a third runway and is 
behaving more and more like a subsidiary of BAA.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This makes a mockery of the Government&amp;rsquo;s carbon reduction 
targets.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Flood insurance must cover those at most risk - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14700</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on the announcement that insurers have agreed to cover households 
with a flood risk of up to one-in-75 years, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow 
Environment Secretary, Steve Webb&lt;/B&gt; said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;It is all very well making insurance available, but it must be affordable to 
people living in the most vulnerable homes.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Even when people can get insurance they may be asked to pay large chunks of 
the cost of claims themselves.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Every year, more and more people move up the flood risk scale. When only 
those whose homes are up to a one in 75 year flood risk can get cover, what 
happens to the growing number of households at a higher risk?&quot; 
&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Emissions targets meaningless without action - Baker</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14690</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Responding to Ruth Kelly&amp;rsquo;s announcement of a consultation on the introduction 
of higher compulsory emissions targets for new cars, the Liberal Democrats have 
highlighted figures showing that the Government is on course to miss its current 
targets.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The current European Commission target is to reduce carbon emissions from new 
cars to 130 g/kg by 2012. However, the current average emissions for new British 
cars is 165 g/kg, and only reduced by 1.4% last year.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Commenting, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker 
&lt;/B&gt;said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Tougher emissions targets are clearly to be welcomed, but without real 
action to meet them they will be meaningless. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The UK&amp;rsquo;s poor performance so far suggests that we will miss even the EU&amp;rsquo;s 
lower 2012 emissions target, let alone these tougher targets. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Without more commitment from the Government today&amp;rsquo;s announcement is just a 
load of hot air.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Nuclear clean-up bill massive and still rising - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14681</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Responding to the Public Accounts Committee report into the cost of nuclear 
decommissioning, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary, Steve 
Webb&lt;/B&gt; said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The cost of nuclear clean-up is massive and still rapidly rising. It is 
extraordinary that estimates of the cost of clean-up seem to increase by 
billions of pounds with almost no public scrutiny or comment. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The biggest single cost of the Department for Business is not supporting 
British business, but cleaning up nuclear waste. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government must urgently provide certainty about the costs of cleaning 
up yesterday&amp;rsquo;s waste, and guarantees that the taxpayer will not end up footing 
the bill for new nuclear waste.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Government emissions target wrong - Webb</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14665</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on the growing Labour rebellion over the Climate Change Bill, 
&lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary, Steve Webb&lt;/B&gt; said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Climate change is bigger than any one political party, so support for the 
Liberal Democrat campaign for an 80% cut by 2050 is welcomed wherever it comes 
from.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Government has got the emissions target wrong and once again it looks 
like its own backbench MPs will have to rebel to get ministers to do the right 
thing.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Both Gordon Brown and David Cameron must come off the fence on this issue. 
By allowing his Tories to constantly abstain David Cameron is showing how hollow 
his green credentials really are.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;The Climate Change Bill is too important to be watered down. The Liberal 
Democrats will be tabling an amendment today to make sure there will be a vote 
on the 80% target.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>Government leaves biofuels questions unanswered - Baker</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14656</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Responding to the Gallagher report into biofuels, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow 
Transport Secretary, Norman Baker &lt;/B&gt;said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Today&amp;rsquo;s statement from the Government is welcome, but it doesn&amp;rsquo;t go far 
enough. It has done nothing to close the loopholes which support unsustainable 
and inefficient US corn-based ethanol. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;It also leaves many questions unanswered. Most importantly, the Government 
needs to explain how carbon emissions in the transport sector will be cut 
further now that the biofuels target has been watered down.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Tory policy, as far as it can be established, is even worse. They want to 
abandon science and throw the biofuel baby out with the 
bathwater.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>
          
            <item>
                <title>We must move away from unsustainable biofuels - Baker</title>
                <link>http://www.libdems.org.uk/environment/story.html?id=14630</link>
                <description>
&lt;P&gt;Commenting on reports that biofuels have pushed up world food prices by up to 
75%, &lt;B&gt;Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker &lt;/B&gt;said:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;This is extremely worrying and a clear sign that we must move away from 
unsustainable biofuels. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;It&amp;rsquo;s time the Government and the EU closed the loopholes that support 
corn-based US bioethanol over more sustainable biofuels.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;However, not all biofuels are the same and we should not overreact and 
abandon the entire project. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;Some biofuels have potential to reduce carbon emissions from transport 
without having this effect on food production, but stringent sustainability 
standards are essential. &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&quot;We must also be aware that estimates of the effects of biofuels on food 
prices vary wildly and we should not rush to judgement until a consensus 
emerges.&quot;&lt;/P&gt;
</description>                
                <pubDate>Fri, 4 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0100</pubDate>                
            </item>

    </channel>



</rss>


