The government has been accused of a cop-out by producing climate change targets ’etched in jelly’.

Legislation setting deadlines was debated in the House of Keys last week.

Although the Climate Change Bill was granted a second reading - meaning the principle is approved - it is clear that many amendments will be tabled when it returns for detailed scrutiny.

Several backbenchers criticised the language of the Bill as too vague and complained there was a lack of incentives to meet targets.

The Bill will put into law the net zero carbon emissions target date of 2050, with an interim target to be set by 2022, when Council of Ministers will also need to have a climate change action plan in place. There is also a target to ban fossil-fuel heating systems in new builds from 2025.

But Bill Shimmins (Middle), was unimpressed by those deadlines.

’This feels like a cop-out from the existing administration,’ he said.

’It is more like the targets are etched in jelly, which might melt away if things get tough.’

He said the Bill provided ’multiple opt-out opportunities’ for the next administration to modify the net-zero emissions year or change interim targets.

Daphne Caine (Garff) was equally scathing, branding some of the language in the bill as ’wishy-washy’ for using words such as ’may’ instead of ’must’.

She wanted to know why the ban on fossil fuel boilers was due to be introduced in 2025, rather than as soon as the bill becomes law.

Mrs Caine added: ’The more I read and re-read the Bill, the more concerned I was that this was greenwashing, the government apparently taking action to combat climate change but in reality nothing meaningful will be implemented - or might be implemented - as a result of this Bill.’

Lawrie Hooper (LibVannin, Ramsey) was also critical of deadlines. In addition, he expressed fears about some of the ’carte blanche’ rules included in the Bill, such as giving environment department officers the power to enter premises without a warrant, to investigate non-criminal breaches of regulations.

But some MHKs were more supportive.

Ralph Peake (Douglas North) said members should not argue over the date for net zero emissions but concentrate on what needed to be done to achieve that.

’I think the momentum is building, which is very welcome,’ he said. ’We can see that around the world and we can see that here in the Isle of Man.’

Opening the debate, Environment Minister Geoffrey Boot described the Bill as a ’significant stage’ in the Council of Ministers’ response to the climate change emergency, saying the legislation was based largely on Scottish law and in reaction to an independent report by Professor James Curran.

’It sets out in law a clear target for net-zero emissions by 2050 and requires the setting of an interim target for the reduction of emissions on the journey to reach that goal,’ Mr Boot said.

The Bill also places a statutory duty on all public bodies to ’require consideration of how to achieve this target’ and an obligation on CoMin to make climate change action plans, with the first due in April 2022.

He described the Bill as a ’comprehensive legislative response’ to the climate change emergency declared by Chief Minister Howard Quayle in 2019.

Responding to the criticism of the 2050 emissions deadline, the minister said: ’All I can say is that 2050 is in line with most other jurisdictions now - the UK, New Zealand, Denmark, etc. It is a 2050 date, but it could be earlier if technology evolves and we are able to meet net zero before 2050.’