Global Warming Policy Foundation
|Type||Educational charity |
|Tax ID No.||06962749 |
|Registration No.||1131448 |
|Founded||November 23, 2009|
|Headquarters||Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining,
1 Carlton House Terrace
London, United Kingdom
|Key people||Nigel Lawson, Chairman
Benny Peiser, Director
|Focus||"to analyse global warming policies and their economic and other implications" |
|Method||"to inform the media, politicians and the public" |
|Revenue||GB£158,008 (FY 2011) |
|Endowment||GB£325,842 (FY 2011) |
The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) is a think tank in the United Kingdom, whose stated aims are to challenge "extremely damaging and harmful policies" envisaged by governments to mitigate anthropogenic global warming.
The foundation was established in November 2009, shortly after the start of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy, and its headquarters occupy a room at the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining. Its director is the social anthropologist Benny Peiser, and it is chaired by former Chancellor of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson. GWPF states that it is "deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated" to address climate change and that it aims to "bring reason, integrity and balance to a debate that has become seriously unbalanced, irrationally alarmist, and all too often depressingly intolerant".
Call for an independent inquiry into Climate Research Unit e-mails 
The GWPF's first act was to call for a high-level, independent inquiry into the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit. A spokesman for the Met Office, a government agency which works with the Climate Research Unit in providing global temperature information, dismissed this call. "If you look at the emails, there isn't any evidence that the data was falsified and there's no evidence that climate change is a hoax. It's a shame that some of the sceptics have had to take this rather shallow attempt to discredit robust science undertaken by some of the world's most respected scientists. The bottom line is that temperatures continue to rise and humans are responsible for it. We have every confidence in the science and the various datasets we use. The peer-review process is as robust as it could possibly be."
Lawson suggested that the e-mails from the University of East Anglia "called into question" the integrity of the scientific evidence. Subsequent investigations did not support this view. GWPF Director Benny Peiser said that the organisation did not doubt the science and wasn’t going to discuss it, but want an open, frank debate about what policies should be adopted.
Funding Sources 
The foundation has rejected freedom of information (FoI) requests to disclose its source of funding on at least four different occasions. As a charity, it is would normally not be required to report its sources of funding.  The judge ruling on the latest FoI request, Alison McKenna, said that "the GWPF wasn't influential enough for disclosure to be merited". Bob Ward, the policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, commented:
- "These [FoI] documents expose once again the double standards promoted by ... the GWPF, who demand absolute transparency from everybody except themselves...The GWPF was the most strident critic during the 'Climategate' row of the standards of transparency practised by the University of East Anglia, yet it simply refuses to disclose basic information about its own secretive operations, including the identity of its funders." 
Charitable Status 
There have been calls for the Charity Commission to reconsider the GWPF's charitable status. Campaigning statements made by Lawson have been said to misrepresent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, and the Charity Commission insist that charities must use factually accurate material when campaigning.
Temperature graph 
When the GWPF's website was launched in November 2009, a graph used in the logo graphic on each page of the website of '21st Century global mean temperatures' showed a slow decline over the selected period from 2001–2008. Hannah Devlin of The Times found an error for 2003 and noted that if the period from 2000–2009 had been chosen, then a rise in temperature would have been shown rather than a fall. Bob Ward said that the graph was contrary to the true measurements, and that by leaving out the temperature trend during the 20th century, the graph obscured the fact that 8 of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred this century. The GWPF blamed a "small error by our graphic designer" for the mistake which would now be changed, but said that starting the graph earlier would be equally arbitrary.
In November 2009, the GWPF listed Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist, as the director, and a board of trustees consisting of Lord Lawson (Chairman), Lord Barnett, Peter R. Forster (the Bishop of Chester), Lord Donoughue, Lord Fellowes, Martin Jacomb, Henri Lepage, Baroness Nicholson, and Lord Turnbull. Sir James Spooner, "a former director of Barclays and J Sainsbury", is "honorary treasurer".
The academic advisory council included Samuel Brittan, Ian Byatt, Freeman Dyson, Christian Gerondeau, David Henderson, Terence Kealey, Anthony Kelly, Richard Lindzen, Alan Peacock, Ian Plimer, Gwyn Prins, Paul Reiter, Philip Stott, Richard Tol, and David Whitehouse.
Andrew William Montford has been appointed to run an inquiry into the three British Climategate-inquiries for the Global Warming Policy Foundation. His report The Climategate Inquiries was published in September 2010, and is sharply critical of the previous inquiries.
According to a press release on the organization's website, GWPF "is funded entirely by voluntary donations from a number of private individuals and charitable trusts. In order to make clear its complete independence, it does not accept gifts from either energy companies or anyone with a significant interest in an energy company." Annual membership contributions are "a minimum of £100".
Citing privacy concerns, Director Benny Peiser declined to reveal the sources of funding for the GWPF. Peiser said GWPF does not receive funding "from people with links to energy companies or from the companies themselves."
In accounts filed at the beginning of 2011 with the Charities Commission and at Companies House, it was revealed that only £8,168 of the £503,302 the Foundation received as income, from its founding in November 2009 until the end of July 2010, came from membership contributions. In response to the accounts, Bob Ward commented that "We can now see that the campaign conducted by the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which includes lobbying newspaper editors and MPs, is well-funded by money from secret donors. Its income suggests that it only has about 80 members, which means that it is a fringe group promoting the interests of a very small number of politically motivated campaigners."
Media reception 
David Aaronovitch noted the GWPF's launch in The Times, writing "Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of 'the (present) majority scientific view', hinting rather slyly at the near possibility of a future, entirely different scientific view. (...) 'Sceptic' (...) is simply a misnomer. People such as Lord Lawson are not sceptical, for if one major peer-reviewed piece of scientific research were ever to be published casting doubt on climate change theory, you just know they’d have it up in neon at Piccadilly Circus. They are only sceptical about what they don’t want to be true."
The Guardian quoted Bob Ward as saying "some of those names are straight from the Who's Who of current climate change sceptics ... It's just going to be a way of pumping material into the debate that hasn't been through scrutiny". The Guardian article cast doubt on the idea that an upsurge in scepticism was underway, noting that "in (the US) Congress, even the most determined opponents of climate change legislation now frame their arguments in economic terms rather than on the science".
Fred Pearce wrote in The Guardian that the three inquiries GWPF looked into were all badly flawed, and that The Climategate Inquiries report ably dissects their failures. He writes that the report, "for all its sharp—and in many cases justified—rejoinders to the official inquiries ... is likely to be ignored in some quarters for its brazen hypocrisy." Pearce argues that one of the criticisms of the three inquiries was that no climate sceptics were on the inquiry teams, and now the critics themselves have produced a review of the reviews that included no one not already supportive of the sceptical position. But, Pearce wrote, Montford "has landed some good blows here." 
- GWPF, "Who We Are". Accessed: June 7, 2012.
- GWPF, "Financial Statements Year Ended 31 July 2011". Accessed: June 7, 2012.
- "Ed Miliband clashes with Lord Lawson on global warming". BBC News (news.bbc.co.uk). 6 December 2009. Retrieved 22 December 2009.
- "Launched today!" (Press release). The Global Warming Policy Foundation. 23 November 2009. Retrieved 22 December 2009.
- Davies, Caroline; Goldenberg, Suzanne (24 November 2009). "The voices of climate change sceptics : Environment". London: The Guardian. Retrieved 6 January 2012.
- Judge, Peter (23 November 2009). "Climate Change Deniers Quote Hacked University Data". eWEEK Europe UK (techweekeurope.co.uk). Retrieved 2012–01-06.
- Leake, Jonathan (29 November 2009). "The great climate change science scandal". The Sunday Times (London: timesonline.co.uk). Retrieved 22 December 2009.
- Lawson, Nigel (24 November 2009). "Copenhagen will fail – and quite right too". The Times (London: timesonline.co.uk). Retrieved 22 December 2009. "Last week an apparent hacker obtained access to their computers and published in the blogosphere part of their internal e-mail traffic. And the CRU has conceded that the at least some of the published e-mails are genuine."
- Ramnarayan, Abhinav (2 December 2009). "Climate change sceptics: Phil Jones inquiry must be 'independent and transparent'". The Times (London: timesonline.co.uk). Retrieved 22 December 2009. "The inquiry into the leaked-emails controversy at the University of East Anglia must be independent and transparent for the sake of science, a prominent climate change sceptic group said today. [...] The investigation comes after e-mails between scientists at the CRU were hacked and posted online by climate change sceptics,"
- Hickman, Leo (23 November 2009). "Climate change champion and sceptic both call for inquiry into leaked emails". The Guardian (London: guardian.co.uk). Retrieved 25 November 2009.
- Aaronovitch, David (24 November 2009). "Strip away the figleaf and reveal naysayers". The Times (London: timesonline.co.uk). Retrieved 24 November 2009.
- Carrington, Damian (22 November 2011). "Chris Huhne blasts Lord Lawson's climate sceptic thinktank". The Guardian (London).
- Ward, Bob (21 October 2011). "Lord Lawson's Global Warming Policy Foundation is spreading errors : Environment". London: The Guardian. Retrieved 19 March 2013. Text " guardian.co.uk " ignored (help)
- Devlin, Hannah (1 December 2009). "Climate sceptics get it wrong". The Times (timesonline.typepad.com). Retrieved 25 December 2009.[dead link]
- Randerson, James (5 December 2009). "Climate sceptics: are they gaining any credence?". The Guardian (London: guardian.co.uk). p. 6. Retrieved 5 December 2009.
- "Board of Trustees". Global Warming Policy Foundation. Retrieved 24 November 2009.
- "Academic Advisory Council". Global Warming Policy Foundation. Retrieved 24 November 2009.
- Miersch, Michael (23 November 2009). "Benny Peiser ist jetzt Direktor der Global Warming Policy Foundation". Die Achse des Guten. achgut.com. Retrieved 25 November 2009.
- Foster, Peter, "Peter Foster: Checking the hockey team", National Post, July 9, 2010. "The third British investigation into the Climategate scandal -- led by former civil servant Sir Muir Russell -- amounts, at best, to a greywash. [...] The U.K.-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, an influential skeptical institution, has now appointed Mr. Montford to run an inquiry into the three British inquiries. There will be no whitewash here, "
- Andrew, Montford (2010-09-14). "The Climategate Inquiries". Global Warming Policy Foundation. Retrieved 2010-09-14. "The report The Climategate Inquiries, written by Andrew Montford and with a foreword by Lord (Andrew) Turnbull, finds that the inquiries into the conduct and integrity of scientists at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia were rushed and seriously inadequate."
- Randerson, James, "'Climategate' inquiries were 'highly defective', report for sceptic thinktank rules", The Guardian, 14 September 2010.
- GWPF, "Join today and become a member". Accessed: May 22, 2012.
- David Aaronovitch (November 24, 2009). "Strip away the figleaf and reveal naysayers". The Times (London). Retrieved January 23, 2010.
- Caroline Davies; Suzanne Goldenberg (November 24, 2009). "The voices of climate change sceptics". The Guardian (London/Manchester). Retrieved January 22, 2010.
- Pearce, Fred. "Montford lands some solid blows in review of 'climategate' inquiries", The Guardian, 14 September 2010.
- The Global Warming Policy Foundation official website