The Global Warming Policy Foundation has admitted defeat in the battle over its controversial status as an educational charity on Friday, with the announcement that it is to launch a new campaign arm in July.

The new arm, called the Global Warming Policy Forum, will not be subject to Charity Commission rules specifying that charities must not have political campaigning as their main aim, and must ensure that campaign materials are accurate.

The foundation’s move follows several complaints about its activities to the Charity Commission.

Last June, I raised concerns with the Commission about inaccurate and misleading information that the foundation has disseminated, including articles on its websites and pamphlets by climate change sceptics, such as the Conservative MP Peter Lilley and Viscount Ridley.

I pointed out that the foundation frequently breaches the Charity Commission’s guidance, which states:

A charity can campaign using emotive or controversial material, where this is lawful and justifiable in the context of the campaign. Such material must be factually accurate and have a legitimate evidence base.

I also highlighted the fact that Lord Lawson, the chairman of the foundation’s trustees, frequently makes inaccurate and misleading statements about climate change in speeches and newspaper articles.



Lawson, who launched the foundation in November 2009 to exploit the controversy surrounding the so-called ‘Climategate’ e-mails that were hacked from the University of East Anglia, has made vigorous efforts to dispute the science of climate change.

In February, he appeared on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme to argue about the science of climate change with Sir Brian Hoskins, the chairman of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London.

And Standpoint magazine this month published an extended article by the former chancellor of the exchequer in which he attacks mainstream climate science as “irrational” and “wicked”.

In the article, Lawson also defends the secrecy around the identities of donors who have given more than £1m to the foundation since its launch, claiming that he wants to protect them from “vilification and abuse”.

However, he also indicates that the foundation does not “solicit nor accept any money from anyone with a significant interest in the energy industry”.

It is not clear whether the new campaign arm will be open and transparent about its sources of funding.

I understand that the foundation’s website will be divided into two parts, with its campaign materials separated out from information relating the remnant charity. I hope the website will also provide a clear warning that its campaign propaganda is not required to be accurate.

Nevertheless, this is a deeply cynical move by the foundation, which clearly does not want to be restricted by rules on accuracy. It has had a damaging impact on the UK public and policy debate about climate change over the past four and a half years. It has successfully marshalled into a single campaign unit what was a rather disparate band of mostly old, white and male contrarians, successfully lobbying government departments and organisations such as the BBC Trust.

Most of the harm has been inflicted through the foundation’s cosy relationship with a handful of cheerleaders in the UK media who have promoted its views heavily, particularly in the Mail, Telegraph and Express newspapers.

The foundation has also exploited woolly thinking among editors and managers at the BBC which has sought to balance scientific facts with ‘sceptic’ fictions in some of its news and current affairs programmes.

But Friday’s announcement should make it clearer that the foundation is more interested in inculcation rather than education.

It also raises the prospect of aligning itself with Ukip, which has embraced climate change denial, in the run-up to the general election next May.

Roger Helmer, Ukip’s energy and climate change spokesperson, will be contesting the Newark by-election in June.

Helmer is known to be a big fan of the foundation and frequently promotes its campaign materials on his blog and on Twitter.

Benny Peiser, the director of the foundation, has previously spoken out against the 2008 Climate Change Act, which commits the UK to reduce its annual emissions of greenhouse gases by at least 80% by 2050 compared with 1990.