Beijing Plans 45 % Emissions Cut By 2020

I find it very hard to believe that China will take carbon emissions by up to 45% as it still will not help the climate change. China and other nations should do a lot more to bring about climate change which includes the UK.

China has announced plans to cut its carbon emissions by up to 45 per cent as measured against its economic output.

The commitment from the world's largest polluter builds momentum before a widely anticipated climate conference in Copenhagen next month.

China also declared that Premier Wen Jiabao would take part in the Copenhagen meeting to demonstrate the country's commitment to the global effort to reduce greenhouse emissions.

The world's fifth-biggest greenhouse gas emitter India has proposed a similar policy to link emissions to growth in GDP, defined as a broad measure of the value of the nation's total output of goods and services.

China: Rich Nations Must Bear The Cost

China's climate envoy Yu Qingtai

China's top climate envoy has said that it plans to seek binding pollution targets for developed countries but reject similar requirements for developing nations at the Copenhagen climate conference next month.

Climate envoy Yu Qingtai said that it was unfair to oblige poorer countries to play a role combating global warming since most of the environmental damage was caused by developed nations during their industrialisation over the last 100 to 200 years.

Mr Yu said: "Developed countries should not make requirements of developing countries that are unreasonable.

"Developed countries should also earnestly ask themselves: 'In solving this problem that I have created, am I keeping my promises and honouring my commitments'?"

The Copenhagen summit aims to negotiate 2020 emissions reduction targets for industrial countries.

It will also ask developing countries to contribute by presenting detailed plans for how they could cut greenhouse gas emissions.

It is unclear how that would be written into any agreement and if developing nations would be required to keep their promises.

China, like other developing countries, wants to keep the framework of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which commits 37 wealthy nations to cutting greenhouse gas emissions but doesn't require any binding commitments from developing countries.

The United States was the only major industrialised nation to reject Kyoto, arguing such cuts would harm its economy.

President Barack Obama, reversing his predecessor George W Bush's position, says the US wants to join a new post-2012 global agreement to rein in emissions.

But in exchange, US negotiators seek some level of commitment from China, India, Brazil and other poorer nations.

China, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, has pledged to reduce its energy consumption per unit of GDP by 20 per cent between 2005 and 2010 and said renewables such as solar and wind power will supply 15 per cent of its energy needs by 2020.

But Beijing is resisting binding emission caps.

Why Conservatives Failed The Test On Islamic Schools

Conservative Party officials made two basic errors in their attack on two schools said to be run by a radical Islamic group, it emerged Wednesday.

During Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons on Wednesday and in briefings afterwards the Conservatives claimed there was no evidence that the schools had been registered or inspected by Ofsted, the education standards watchdog; they also said the schools had received money from an anti-terrorism fund. But yesterday the claims were beginning to unravel. The most obvious mistake was the allegation that they appeared not to have been registered or inspected.

In fact, one of the two schools – in Slough, Berkshire – had posted a glowing commendation from Ofsted on its website. The report was easily accessible by Googling the Islamic Shakhsiyah Foundation, and its veracity could be confirmed with Ofsted.

It praised the school for its "broad and balanced curriculum" and for its commitment to the "spiritual, moral, social and cultural development" of its 55 four- to 10-year-old pupils.

The second error, over the allegation that state finance from a fund designed to combat terrorism was being channelled into an extremist school dedicated to the overthrow of Western culture, was perhaps more serious.

The waters here were slightly muddier, although the Conservatives were mistaken again. Money from a government fund was paid to both schools – the second is in Haringey, north London – but the £113,000 concerned came from a fund designed to promote nursery education and distributed by local councils; the fund just happened to have the same name, Pathfinder, as the anti-terrorist fund.

Haringey council suspended funding when the controversy over the running of the two schools broke a month ago. An official inquiry has found "no evidence to suggest inappropriate content or influence in the school".

Slough council said it was satisfied with its school, citing the Ofsted report in the school's defence.

A third allegation concerned the extent of Hizb ut-Tahrir's involvement with the school. The Government has faced pressure to ban the organisation, which supports "Muslim liberation", for alleged extremist views.

David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader, told the House of Commons: "Two schools have been established by an extremist Islamist foundation, the ISF, which is a front organisation for Hizb ut-Tahrir." He added: "Two of its four trustees are members of Hizb ut-Tahrir and the headteacher and proprietor of one of the schools [in Slough] are members of Hizb ut-Tahrir."

Farah Ahmed, the head in question, told the BBC she was not a member. The proprietor of the Slough school, Yusra Hamilton, who is the wife of a Hizb ut-Tahrir member, has since resigned as a trustee of the school.

The Haringey school has told the local council it no longer has links with "any of the individuals alleged to have connections with Hizb ut-Tahrir".