The   UK Energy and Climate Change Committee requested submissions from the public for an inquiry into the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). The terms of reference listed 12 questions concerning the AR5 to be addressed.

The Committee has published HTML and PDF versions of the submissions for the "IPCC 5th Assessment Review" on their website here.

The FoS submission by Ken Gregory is here (html) and here (pdf)
The submission by Dr. Neil Hutton is here (html) and here (pdf)

The published submissions on the government website are slightly modified from the original versions.

The original version of the Friends of Science submission is here.

The original version of the submission by Dr. Neil Hutton is here.

UK Commons Committee received a modest response of   44 comments.   Of   30 responses from individuals 27 (90%)were clearly highly critical of AR5 with only 3 concluding that the findings were robust.   On the other hand Institutions especially those dependent on Govt Funding and those who had previously committed to AGW, exclusively supported the findings of AR5; notwithstanding the obvious contradictions, the "hiatus", (no warming in last 17 years) failure of models to match observations, and lack of any evidence to link warming to human activities.   The obvious culprits, THe UK Met Office, Royal Met Society, Grantham Institute for Climate Change, The Royal Society, U of Reading, Nat Energy Research Council, and U of East Anglia.   In all 11 of 44 indicated support for AR5.   That is only 25%, dominantly institutions with vested interests in the AGW status quo.

One hopes there may be some intelligent people on the committee who have the wit to understand that AR5 is as robust as an overinflated balloon and will soon burst.