VoteClimate: Sir Desmond Swayne MP: Climate Timeline

Sir Desmond Swayne MP: Climate Timeline

Desmond Swayne is the Conservative MP for New Forest West.

We have identified 30 Parliamentary Votes Related to Climate since 2010 in which Desmond Swayne could have voted.

Desmond Swayne is rated Anti for votes supporting action on climate. (Rating Methodology)

  • In favour of action on climate: 2
  • Against: 27
  • Did not vote: 1

Compare to other MPs:

Why don't you Contact Desmond Swayne MP now and tell them how much climate means to you?

Desmond Swayne's Climate-related Tweets, Speeches & Votes

We've found the following climate-related tweets, speeches & votes by Desmond Swayne

  • 27 Jun 2024: Tweet

    RT @Conservatives: ???? BREAKING ???? Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury has revealed that Labour's Net Zero plans won't just cost… [Source]
  • 17 Jun 2024: Tweet

    RT @Conservatives: Labour will pursue Net Zero no matter the cost to families and livelihoods. Keir Starmer would take us back to square o… [Source]
  • 19 Oct 2022: Vote

    Ban on Fracking for Shale Gas Bill - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 13 Dec 2021: Vote

    Subsidy Control Bill — Schedule 1 - The subsidy control principles - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 07 Jun 2021: Vote

    Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill — New Clause 1 - Human Rights Abuses - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 26 May 2021: Vote

    Environment Bill — New Clause 24 - Prohibition on burning of peat in upland areas - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 13 Jan 2021: Vote

    Financial Services Bill — Schedule 2 - Prudential regulation of FCA investment firms - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 08 Dec 2020: Vote

    Delegated Legislation — Financial Assistance to Industry - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 16 Nov 2020: Vote

    Pension Schemes Bill [Lords] — Clause 124 - Climate change risk - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 12 Oct 2020: Vote

    Agriculture Bill — After Clause 42 - Contribution of agriculture and associated land use to climate change targets - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 29 Sep 2020: Vote

    United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — New Clause 6 - Economic development: climate and nature emergency impact statement - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 03 Jul 2020: Tweet

    Earlier in the week I took part in a useful and positive exchange with constituents about climate change. It is not beyond our wit to reverse the damage that we’ve done to the planet, and to enjoy a better quality of life. You can read my blog here -https://www.desmondswaynemp.com/blogs/ https://x.com/DesmondSwayne/status/1279085944738643970/photo/1 [Source]
  • 05 Feb 2020: Vote

    Transport - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 03 Dec 2019: Tweet

    Our first budget will prioritise the environment by investing in: ????‍????Research and Development ➖Decarbonisation schemes ????‍♀️New flood defences (£4 billion in coming years) ????Electric vehicle infrastructure (a national plug-in network and Gigafactory) ☀️Clean energy. #VoteTory???????????? https://x.com/DesmondSwayne/status/1201792133256110080/photo/1 [Source]
  • 25 Jun 2019: Vote

    Delegated Legislation — Value Added Tax - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 6 Jun 2019: Parliamentary Speech

    I think we are spending £1.5 billion in the current period on climate change for less-developed nations, and the same amount—£1.5 billion—on promoting economic development and trade, so there is some synergy for us to work with, is there not?

    Full debate: Oral Answers to Questions

  • 13 Dec 2017: Parliamentary Speech

    I shall speak to amendment 352, which seeks to maintain for future trade deals the EU rights and protections that are currently enjoyed in other trade deals. A problem that has already been mentioned is that we are going to move away from the comfort zone of the EU, a massive trading bloc which, on 8 December, agreed the key provisions for a trade deal with Japan that will embrace 30% of global GDP and 600 million people and that has integrated in it the Paris agreement. It does not have investor-state dispute settlement, but it does have various protections. One of my key fears about that particular agreement, which will come into effect in March 2019, is that such agreements take a long time to put together. If we want to come along after the event and say, “Can we join in?” the chances are that the terms will not be as good.

    Full debate: European Union (Withdrawal) Bill

  • 06 Sep 2016: Vote

    Finance Bill — VAT on Installation of Energy Saving Materials - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 15 Jun 2016: Parliamentary Speech

    On the point about opportunities, does the Minister agree that we need policy coherence between the climate change goals and economic development policies?

    Full debate: Developing Countries: Jobs and Livelihoods

  • 13 Jun 2016: Parliamentary Speech

    Overseas aid is also undoubtedly controversial; it has to be. If I am spending British taxpayers’ money on helping the people of Bangladesh who live on the chars to deal with climate change and flooding, it is clearly not available to deal with flood defences in Durham, York or elsewhere. However, I put it this way: we have pledged to spend 0.7% of our national income on international development, which means that we have 99.3% to spend on ourselves. I do not know anyone who spends 99.3% of their income on themselves; I am not sure I want to know such a person, and I am not so sure that they would have any friends. That is equally true of a nation. What influence would we have in the world, and how could we carry our heads high, if that were the case, and we were to abandon this important pledge? It is important to focus what we spend, rigorously demanding value for money, and ensuring that we have the systems to secure that and to drive down costs, so that we get proper value.

    The reality is that over the past five years, we have delivered education for 11 million schoolchildren; 69 million people have received financial assistance and services to trade their way out of poverty; 29 million people have benefited from our nutrition programmes; 5 million people, as my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Steve Double) said, have benefited from having healthcare professionals attend at birth; 63 million people have had access to clean water; 15 million people have been able to cope with climate change; 44 million children have been immunised; and we have delivered emergency care to 13 million people in the wake of 33 disasters. That is a measure of the importance of what we are doing.

    Full debate: Foreign Aid Expenditure

  • 09 May 2016: Vote

    Housing and Planning Bill — Planning obligations and affordable housing - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 03 May 2016: Vote

    Housing and Planning Bill — Neighbourhood right of appeal - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 14 Mar 2016: Vote

    Energy Bill [Lords] — New Clause 8 — Decarbonisation target range - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Mar 2016: Vote

    Energy Bill [Lords] — New Clause 3 — Carbon capture and storage strategy for the energy industry - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 16 Dec 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    We are currently spending some €600,000 on a project to assist with desalination. Funds are available through our climate change fund for a long-term solution to this problem, but the level of investment and the marshalling of the factors of production will require a long-term peace process to be viable.

    Full debate: Oral Answers to Questions

  • 19 Nov 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    The 10th replenishment, which covers the period from 2016 to 2018, is intended to raise $1.44 billion in order to disburse loans and grants to the tune of $3 billion. The United Kingdom’s share is to be some £57 million, which equates to some £19 million per year. That is an increase of £2 million per year from the last disbursement —the last was £17 million per year—or of some 15%. I believe that that increase reflects the identity of the International Fund for Agricultural Development and its objectives as well as our own preoccupations, particularly in preparing for climate change and gender issues. We will remain the second largest donor and an active member of the governing body.

    On 3 November, I launched our new agricultural framework at the all-party group on agriculture and food for development. At the centre of our new approach is support for smallholders. That is vital because they feed a third of the world’s population and indeed, in developing countries, feed 90% of the population. If the world is to support some 9 billion souls by 2050, despite the disadvantages of climate change and the increase in plant and animal disease consequent on climate change, we will need to maximise the productivity of those smallholders and their economic potential. In effect, we will have to enable them to become commercial farmers.

    Increasingly, the fund is focused on building resilience to climate change. It runs the largest global fund dedicated to supporting the adaptation of smallholders to climate change, to which we have contributed significantly—I am afraid that the Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme comes with the unpleasant acronym ASAP, but perhaps there is urgency in the agenda. The fund is consistent with and abides by the international aid transparency initiative.

    Full debate: Draft International Fund for Agricultural Development (Tenth Replenishment) Order 2015

    We are currently working through the multilateral aid review, in which we closely examine the fit with all our international partners to ensure that their view of the development agenda fits with ours; that they share our focus on women and girls, on climate change and on economic development; and, equally, that they meet the standards we require on transparency. I hope that we continue with a consensual approach to international development. I am confident that we share the same aims, even if we might differ on some essentials. Nevertheless, I thank her for supporting this order.

    Full debate: Draft International Fund for Agricultural Development (Tenth Replenishment) Order 2015

  • 26 Oct 2015: Vote

    Finance Bill (Ways and Means) (Payment of Corporation Tax) — Chapter 5 — Supplementary provisions - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Sep 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    Secondly, the hon. Gentleman asked about the multilateral aid review. The last review said that we were getting good value for money, and that the bank’s performance was generally very good. There was some concern at the corporate level about the lack of emphasis on women and girls, and also about climate change, which the hon. Gentleman mentioned. The MAR is not a one-off process. We provided, because of our determination to improve the bank’s performance, £2 million of technical assistance to enable it to improve. A special envoy on gender has been appointed and we are confident that the bank is performing well on that metric. On climate change, the bank’s 10-year plan is to make Africa transform into a clean energy continent. Increasing the focus on climate change is welcome and now meets our requirements.

    Full debate: Draft African Development Bank (Further Payments to Capital Stock) Order 2015

  • 10 Sep 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    I want to put on the record the thanks of the Opposition to our excellent negotiating team in New York, who I had the privilege of meeting. While the Minister is walking us through the goals, I wonder if he might say a few words about the two goals that I mentioned, specifically the placeholder language in the climate change goal and the need for a commitment to universal healthcare within the language of goal 3. He mentioned that he had some regrets about the process. I wonder if he shares those two in particular.

    There is the full integration of climate change into the heart of the process. At the last minute—I hope this will be of some comfort to my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy)—we even secured the language that we wanted on anti-microbial resistance. There is the inclusion of modern-day slavery, on which there is cross-party consensus.

    In line with that is the multilateral aid review. We have to examine all the partners through which we operate. Are they delivering value for money? Are their objectives aligned with ours? Are they efficient? Are they still a useful operating model? All that has to take place. At the same time, there will be some conditioning as a consequence of the security and defence review, which will guide policy in those areas of the world where our concern is greatest. Our spending portfolio will have to evolve. We will have to do development differently and integrate climate change into everything we do. We have to be climate smart in all our projects and all our doings. These are things we will develop over the next few years.

    The hon. Member for Aberavon (Stephen Kinnock) brought to bear his important experience from Sierra Leone and his other operations. He rightly drew attention to the importance of our pitch at the Paris climate change summit in December. I have spent some time over the summer visiting countries and getting them to up their game in their offer for Paris. In particular, I have encouraged Bangladesh to make sure— [ Interruption. ] I see that I am trespassing on the time. I am sorry if I have been unable to answer all the questions; I will write to hon. Members, but I must give the remaining time to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham.

    Full debate: Sustainable Development Goals

  • 08 Sep 2015: Vote

    Bill Presented — Devolution (London) Bill — Clause 45 — CCL: removal of exemption for electricity from renewable sources - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 14 Jul 2015: Vote

    21. Climate Change Levy: Removal of Exemption for Electricity from Renewable Sources - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 28 Jan 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    I thought the remarks of the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth on fair trade were particularly pithy. He rightly drew attention to the false dichotomy between security and defence, and development; they are intimately connected. My right hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Sir Tony Baldry) gave us the advantage of his 30 years’ experience, including as a Minister, and rightly drew our attention back to climate change and sustainability. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (Joan Walley) highlighted the important report from the Environmental Audit Committee and asked several detailed questions. I offer her a trade. I have every intention of reading her report, but perhaps she will read this report: “A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development”. It is all in here: exactly how every single one of the targets has to be permeated with the key issue of sustainability. We are confident that the goals will be universal and we are ready to play our part: we have a strong cross-Government approach to this agenda, which is crucial to ensuring that all Departments are engaged and that the UK will be well placed to deliver these goals—it says.

    The hon. Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) brought her long experience and knowledge of nutrition to this debate, but when she went on to climate change there was an element of criticism. I would point out that we were one of the few countries that constantly tried to get a specific reference to the 2° target back into the goals.

    When it comes to climate change, there is again no division of substance between us. On equality, there is the principle of no one being left behind before a target can be met. Again, there is absolutely no division of substance between us.

    Full debate: Sustainable Development Goals

  • 04 Dec 2013: Vote

    Recall of Elected Representatives — Schedule 4 — Application and modification of emissions limit duty - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 04 Jun 2013: Vote

    Energy Bill — Clause 133 — Financial provisions - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye
  • 04 Jun 2013: Vote

    Energy Bill — Clause 10 — Direction to offer contract - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 04 Jun 2013: Vote

    Energy Bill — Clause 1 — Decarbonisation - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 03 Jun 2013: Vote

    Communities and Local Government — Clause 42 — Duty not to exceed annual carbon dioxide emissions limit - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: No
  • 19 Dec 2012: Vote

    Charities Act 2011 (Amendment) — Energy Bill - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 17 Oct 2012: Vote

    Relationship, Drug and Alcohol Education (Curriculum) — New Clause 22 — Interpretation of the green purposes: duty to assess impact on the Climate Change Act 2008 - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Sep 2011: Vote

    Prime Minister — Clause 42 — Domestic energy efficient regulations - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Sep 2011: Vote

    Prime Minister — Clause 42 — Domestic energy efficient regulations - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Sep 2011: Vote

    Prime Minister — New Clause 1 — Energy efficiency aim - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 7 Jan 2010: Parliamentary Speech

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps his Department is taking to encourage the further development of carbon capture and storage technology; and if he will make a statement. ( 308902 )

    Full debate: Carbon Sequestration

Maximise your vote to save the planet.

Join Now