Dear Mr Simpson

RE: Freedom of Information Requests - Meetings with non believers

Invitation to clarify request

Thank you for your request of 5 May 2009 on the above subject which falls under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I can also confirm that your other request on global/UK temperature projections has also been received on 5 May and will be responded to separately.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change wants to be as open as possible in answering requests. The Act itself also requires us to help people obtain the information they are looking for. Unfortunately, Government Ministers receive a large number of requests for meetings from individuals and organizations and to help us identify any organizations that may have approached a minister requesting a meeting to challenge the government's view on global warming we would like some clarification on what you mean by disagreeing with the “government's view on global climate change or man-made global warming”.

For example, disagreeing with the government view could mean an opinion that the government is underestimating the human effect on climate hence its climate change policies are likely to be inadequate (some who advocate geo-engineering hold this view as well as several environmentalists); or it could mean agreeing that humans are changing the climate but the Government is simply pursuing the wrong policies to address it. Alternatively, it could mean disagreement over the scientific basis of human caused climate change - in particular that human emissions of greenhouse gases will have little effect on future global temperature because the current warming trend is of natural origin or the warming is the result of urbanisation- there is no evidence of greenhouse gas warming. Or greenhouse gases do cause warming but the positive feedbacks are being overestimated so that future temperature rises will not really be as high as the Government is projecting. Another highly contentious area is on the economics of climate change - in particular the conclusions of the Stern Review which have been accepted by the Government.

If you do not wish to clarify your request but still want us to consider it, please let us know. However, if we conclude that responding to the request would involve too great a diversion of resources you should be aware that we may have to charge for the information or even refuse the request.

Please let me know how you would like us to proceed.

Yours sincerely

Paul Munro

Climate and Energy: Science and Analysis

Email [email address]