House of Commons Hansard Debates for 25 Jun 1992

Mr. Newton : Although I recognise my hon. Friend's concern and the reasons for it, I cannot promise to find Government time for a debate before the recess, but he will be aware that there are usually--and, indeed, will be--significant opportunities for such a debate on the motion for the Adjournment of the House for the summer recess and in Adjournment debates thereafter. My hon. Friend might like to bear them in mind.

Mr. Bob Cryer (Bradford, South) : Could the Leader of the House assure us that we shall have a statement on Monday at the beginning of the Report stage of the British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Bill, because the legislation is putting the Leeds-Bradford electrification in jeopardy? It is because of the legislation that the Royal Bank of Scotland has said that, although the overhead electrification has been started, it cannot go ahead with the leasing of the rolling stock until it receives guarantees from the Government about future provision. The Government will not give those guarantees, so will the Leader of the House tell us whether there will be a statement? There will be an important meeting in Bradford city hall at 5 pm tomorrow, and we need some means of determining the provision ; otherwise, everything will be put in jeopardy and the fault will lie with the Government.

Mr. Newton : I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an undertaking about a statement in advance of Monday's debate apart from what I have already said about a statement on the outcome of the Lisbon Council. As I said

Column 397

last week, the hon. Gentleman has shown considerable ingenuity in these matters and I have no doubt that he will find a way of extracting a comment from the Minister during the debate.

Mr. Spencer Batiste (Elmet) : Has my right hon. Friend had an opportunity to read early-day motion 263?

[That this House warmly welcomes the establishment of National Music Day on 28th June ; and encourages as many people as possible, professionals, amateurs and first timers, to participate in this exciting event.]

At the same time, is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a grave threat to the teaching of music, especially to primary school children, as a result of the withdrawal of peripatetic music teaching in many parts of the country, including Leeds? Would it be possible to have a debate on that subject at an early date, because so many parents, children and teachers value the teaching of music and do not want it to be threatened?

Mr. Newton : My hon. Friend may like to remember what I said a few moments ago about the various opportunities that will arise in the next two to three weeks for raising various matters--including, perhaps, the one that he has in mind.

The Government warmly welcome national music day, and hope that the celebrations that take place this weekend will become an annual event.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) : Have the Government forgotten the situation of the 5,000 or more of our fellow countrymen working in Libya? Next week, will he consider the request made by my hon. Friend the Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood), as Chairman of the Select Committee on European Legislation, to consider at least three orders which the Committee considers should be taken on the Floor of the House? Is that not all the more urgent in view of what some of us learned this morning from Lloyd's of London--that serious people in the insurance market at Lloyd's want a statement to be made before considerable sums are paid out in relation to Lockerbie?

Mr. Newton : I note what the hon. Gentleman says, and shall certainly consider his request.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood) : May I draw to my right hon. Friend's attention a letter in The Times written by our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport about the outcome of the important EC Council of Transport Ministers in Europe on Monday, which will be of the greatest consequence to the travelling public, to the airlines, and to the future of competition and the regulation of civil air transport within Europe? The Secretary of State for Transport did not make a statement to the House, as he should have done, so will the Leader of the House protect the interests of this place by ensuring that the House has time to debate civil air transport at an early date?

Mr. Newton : In all honesty, I must say that it would be difficult to fit in a debate before the recess, alongside all the other matters which the House is interested in debating. However, an opportunity may arise on one of the occasions that I have mentioned. I endorse what I took to be a compliment, at the outset of my hon. Friend's

Column 398

question, on my right hon. Friend's the Secretary of State's achievements at the Council. It was a great achievement on the way to the completion of the single market, especially the aviation package, which will be greatly to the advantage of industry and of consumers and customers in this country.

Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley) : Does the Leader of the House recognise the growing concern about the obvious ease with which pension funds can be abused, which was illustrated by the Belling group abuse highlighted this week? Will he say whether the Government will be able to make a statement next week on how they intend to introduce immediate legislation to block those abuses and safeguard pension funds, for the security of the people to whom those funds really belong?

Mr. Newton : I understand why the hon. Gentleman raises that matter- -for the second time in a few days, I believe. He will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security announced only three or four weeks ago the setting up of a substantial inquiry into the law and regulations on pension funds. That is the right way to proceed. It will take more than a week or two, but my right hon. Friend has said that it will be pressed ahead with considerable vigour.

Mr. Simon Coombs (Swindon) : Is my right hon. Friend aware that three of my constituents were killed in a serious motor accident on the A420 at Longcot in south Oxfordshire on Monday afternoon? In view of that, and of the continually rising road toll in this country, will he ask his colleagues in the Department of Transport to come to the House, and will he provide time, for a debate on road safety and the resources available for improving some of the narrow and winding roads that still exist on our main road network?

Mr. Newton : I will certainly draw the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport to my hon. Friend's comments. I am sure that I speak for all hon. Members in saying that we join my hon. Friend in expressing sympathy for the relatives of those killed in that awful accident.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North) : May we have a statement from the Home Secretary early next week on the press reports, especially those which appeared yesterday, that the Cabinet has finally decided that there should be a limited form of parliamentary scrutiny of the Security Service? Is the Leader of the House aware that if, as we hope, such a statement is made before the House rises for the summer recess, many of us will take exception to the fact that the parliamentary scrutiny will be limited and that the committee will be confined to the most senior Privy Councillors on the Back Benches? May we have a debate on the subject?

Mr. Newton : Like the hon. Gentleman, I have noted the speculation, but I cannot make further comment about it.

Mr. Jimmy Wray (Glasgow, Provan) : Would the Leader of the House consider persuading the Secretary of State for the Environment and the Secretary of State for Scotland to come clean on the reports and controversy surrounding the secret meetings between the Scottish Office, Ofwat and CitNat regarding the idea of setting up six boards to take over and to privatise the Scottish water industry?

Column 399

Mr. Newton : For once, one of the intended recipients of the endless messages I pass--the Secretary of State for the Environment--is sitting beside me and can receive this message directly. I will ensure that it is also transmitted to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Mr. Gordon McMaster (Paisley, South) : Will the Leader of the House find time next week for a debate or even a statement on the case of the British nuclear test veterans? Is he aware that I recently received a reply from the Prime Minister in which he stated that he was now ready sympathetically to consider a claim for compensation? There has been further press speculation this week that the Government will change their minds after so long. Does the Leader of the House not think that it is time that the ever-diminishing number of veterans and the ever-increasing number of widows got justice?

Mr. Newton : I will draw the attention of my relevant right hon. Friends to the hon. Gentleman's point.

Mr. John Hutton (Barrow and Furness) : May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to early-day motion 310, which has the support of almost 100 of my hon. Friends?

[That this House notes with concern the findings of the Report by the National Citizens' Advice Bureaux into the employment rights of pregnant women ; and calls upon the Government to provide effective protection against dismissal to all pregnant women, irrespective of how long they have been employed, and to approve The Pregnant Women at Work Directive at the Council of Ministers meeting on Wednesday 24th June.]

In light of the publication this week of both the report by the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux and the annual report by the Equal Opportunities Commission, does the Leader of the House agree that next week would be an appropriate time for a debate, in Government time, on the important issues raised in both reports?

Mr. Newton : The hon. Gentleman will, I think, know that the Government made a commitment in the Conservative party manifesto to strengthen the rights of pregnant women in the workplace, and we will seek to do that in appropriate ways. I cannot promise a debate next week.

Mr. John Austin-Walker (Woolwich) : In view of the Government's declared commitment to Europe, the correspondence received from the European Commissioner for the Environment and the Prime Minister's statement in Rio and in the House in support of species conservation, will the Leader of the House find time next week or at least before the recess to discuss early-day motion 68?

[That this House expresses concern that the Secretary of State for Transport appears to be willing to press ahead with the construction of the East London River Crossing and the destruction of the 8,000 year-old Oxleas Wood, a site of special scientific interest ; calls for a halt to such plans ; and demands a full environmental impact assessment of the proposals in accordance with the European Directive.]

That would allow the House to take a decision which might stop this country falling foul of European environmental protection legislation.

Column 400

Mr. Newton : The reason why my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment is sitting beside me is that we are about to have the second full day's debate on Rio in two or three weeks. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman is pushing his luck in asking for further time. I suspect that he may find an opportunity to make his point in the next few hours.

Mr. Andrew MacKinlay (Thurrock) : Have any of the right hon. and hon. Friends of the Leader of the House complained to him about the inadequate time given last week to debating the Army, Air Force and Naval Discipline Acts (Continuation) Order 1992? The debate was dominated by Ministers and Front-Bench Members. Will the Leader of the House find time before the recess to have a general debate on discipline in the armed services in which some of us who signed an early-day motion may be able to broach the subject of the 307 brave British soldiers who were executed in the 1914-18 war and for whom we now seek a posthumous pardon?

Mr. Newton : I do not think that I can give the undertaking that the hon. Gentleman seeks, but it sounds like another of the subjects for which an opportunity might be found by a little ingenuity on his part within the next fortnight.

Points of Order

4.19 pm

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will recall that, during Prime Minister's Question Time, I had Question No. 5 to the Prime Minister, in which I asked a question about London's homeless. There was a great deal of noise when the Prime Minister replied, so you may not have heard his answer properly. It seemed to me that he got lost somewhere outside London while giving the answer. The question was about London's homeless, but the Prime Minister chose to tell the House about Salford and Manchester. Could you advise me on the best means of getting the Prime Minister to answer a question about the problem of London's homeless? That was my question.

Madam Speaker : The best advice that I can give the hon. Gentleman is to apply again to put a question to the Prime Minister. Better luck next time.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) : Should we not thank you, Madam Speaker, for allowing business questions to run their full span?

Madam Speaker : The only thing that I can say in answer to that is that, if hon. Members co-operate by putting questions briskly, and the Lord President co-operates in answering, I am keen to call Back Benchers at business questions. I thank the hon. Gentleman.

BILL PRESENTED

Adoption of Roads (Compulsory Procedures)

Mr. John Hutton presented a Bill to make provision for the compulsory adoption of certain unadopted roads ; to make consequential amendments of the law ; and for connected purposes : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 13 November 1992 and to be printed. [Bill 46.]

Column 401

Earth Summit

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Kirkhope.]

[ Relevant documents : The Second Report from the Environment Committee, Session 1990-91, Visit by the Committee to Brazil, HC 60, the Third Report from the Environment Committee, Session 1990-91, Climatological and Environmental Effects of Rainforest Destruction, HC 24, and the Government's Reply thereto, Cm. 1579. ]

Madam Speaker : May I inform the House that many hon. Members want to speak in the debate. Therefore, I have had to impose a 10-minute time limit between 7 pm and 9 pm. May I ask those who speak outside that time to show some voluntary restraint in order to be helpful in allowing all those who wish to speak to be called?

4.20 pm

The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Michael Howard) : Just over three weeks ago I stood at this Dispatch Box on the day the Earth summit in Rio began. At that time I set out to the House in detail our goals for that conference and the work that the United Kingdom Government had been doing to achieve those goals. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister told the House on his return from Rio of the real success that had been achieved. The summit was far more successful than many had thought possible. That was due in no small part to the leading role played by the Government in the preparatory meetings leading up to the conference and in the negotiatons that took place during it.

I should like today to set out in some detail not only the achievements of the summit but the way in which we see things moving forward. Rio began an evolutionary process. We are committed to sustaining the momentum of that process.

Let us start with the summit itself. Some dismissed it as a failure before it began, but it was the largest-ever gathering of world leaders. The level of commitment was clearly demonstrated by the unprecedented number of signatures on the two major conventions, less than 10 days after they were opened for signing : 153 states and the Economic Community in each case. The personal commitment of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the success of the summit was clear from the outset when he became one of the first world leaders to announce his firm intention to attend. He carried that forward by persuading his G7 colleagues of its importance. His speech at the summit gave a clear international lead on many of the most vital issues before the conference.

One of the most important achievements of the conference was the framework convention on climate change. It took 16 months to negotiate and provides a significant first step in the global response to climate change. It commits countries to devise measures to combat climate change and to report on those measures. It also commits all developed countries to take measures aimed at returning emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by the year 2000. The convention is a sensible precautionary response to a problem the full extent of which is as yet unknown.

Albert Schweitzer said :

"Man has lost the capacity to foresee and forestall. He will end by destroying the earth."

Column 402

Our scientists have foreseen what could happen if we take no action. We are taking action to prevent damage on the scale which some predict.

As our knowledge improves--

Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury) : Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way ?

Mr. Howard : Perhaps I can develop my argument, then I shall give way.

As our knowledge improves we may need to make further commitments. The convention provides for a strong review process to assess the effectiveness of the action being taken and the need for further action. Some people have criticised the convention for being weak, or of having been watered down to suit the United States, but the commitment to take measures is not weak. Nor is the commitment to report on the effect that the measures are having and to monitor progress towards the targets. The convention is strong, and I believe that it will be effective. All the major economic powers are on board. If one is engaged in an evolutionary process, as we are, it is essential to involve as many people as possible in that process. Involving the US Government in the process was crucial. The US contributes nearly a quarter of total world CO emissions and it is some vindication of involving the US that President Bush, with other world leaders, has called for rapid implementation of the convention. We have joined in that call. We are pressing for early ratification of the convention and we are already taking action to implement it. We have placed in the House Library a document setting out our initial strategy on limiting CO emissions, and are urging all developed countries to join us in our commitment to publish full national programmes by the end of next year.

Mrs. Ann Taylor : The Minister will be aware that concern still exists about the clarity of the Government's commitment to stabilisation of CO emissions by 2000. The convention says, and the Prime Minister said in his statement, that the United Kingdom will make that commitment, provided that others do so as well. We know that the Americans will not treat that as a binding target. What exactly is the Government's position?

Mr. Howard : The Government's position has been made absolutely clear on many occasions. The hon. Lady seems not to understand that, with what is undoubtedly a global problem of this kind, one needs a global response if it is to be effective. If the United Kingdom Government engaged in unilateral action it would achieve nothing--no more than would have been achieved if the United Kingdom had engaged in the unilateral action on nuclear disarmament so vigorously urged upon us by Opposition Members. The proper way forward is multilateral action--a global response to a global problem.

Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) : Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way?

Mr. Howard : I am answering the hon. Lady's question. In this case the distinction is academic, because we know that other countries will take similar action.

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington) : What about the United States?

Mr. Howard : The hon. Lady asked a question. The hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours), who is

Column 403

to wind up the debate, seems unable to restrain himself from making comments from a sedentary position, and asks about the United States.

The United States has committed itself to a comprehensive series of measures which will--of themselves and without taking into account further action that the United States Government and the state governments intend to take--bring them within a whisker of achieving what the convention commits the United States Government to. Mrs. Ann Taylor rose --

Mr. Howard : The hon. lady is going to reply to my speech. I would give way, but I do not think that it would be fair to the House to turn the debate into a dialogue.

At Rio, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced an initiative to ensure that developing countries can share the benefits of environmentally sound technology, through partnership with British companies. Called the technology partnership initiative, it will promote United Kingdom capacity in environmentally friendly technologies, and promote those technologies in overseas markets. It will play an important part in providing developing countries with the technology that they need to play their part in implementing the convention.

The main focus of the initiative will be a global technology partnership conference and exhibition of United Kingdom technology early next year. It is not merely very high-tech technologies that will be shared. I have recently had meetings with the Environment Ministers of both India and Pakistan. A major concern for both of them is the provision of clean drinking water. In the United Kingdom we have tremendous expertise in that area, and tremendous experience in making it relevant and appropriate for local circumstances in countries overseas. Our initiative is designed to bring the expertise and the need together.

The United Kingdom Government also signed the convention on biological diversity. Before Rio few people know what biological diversity was. The extensive press coverage of the Earth summit has changed all that. The conservation of biodiversity is now widely recognised to be important in both economic and ethical terms. That convention is important not only because of its subject matter, but because of what it attempts to do by way of forging partnership between north and south. It will help the benefits of biological resources to be shared equitably between the countries in which they grow and the countries that develop them. Countries will be required to identify and monitor important species and to set up networks of protected areas to safeguard them. That requirement applies to developed countries as well as to those still developing. It applies to us. It will be harder, of course, for many other countries, particularly those near the equator where the greatest diversity of species occur, and where administrative structures are not as sophisticated as ours. So the convention offers help to such countries to devise national plans which meet their own particular national needs as well as safeguarding the biodiversity of the planet.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) : By what mechanism will we monitor our situation? Why was no one from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Dr. O'Connor or anyone else on the delegation to Rio?

Column 404

Mr. Howard : We sent a large delegation to Rio, which comprised many representatives of non-governmental organisations. It also included the hon. Gentleman's colleague, the shadow spokesman on overseas development, the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd). I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recognise that it was not possible to accommodate everyone. We take seriously the involvement of non-governmental organisations, not only in our delegation at Rio, but in our continuing work to take forward the process that was decided upon at Rio.

The House will recall that when we last debated the Earth summit the Government were still considering the text of the convention. In common with other OECD donor countries, we had reservations about the financial provisions. We were concerned that the developed countries might be put in the position of providing financial support with a blank cheque. We studied the text carefully and we are now confident that the difficulties can be overcome. We will continue to play a leading role in promoting the convention, and we have offered to host the first meeting of the conference of the parties to the biodiversity convention.

We are also taking follow-up action through the Darwin initiative for the survival of species, which the Prime Minister announced in his speech at Rio. That will build on the United Kingdom's recognised scientific and commercial strengths in biodiversity. Our centres of excellence are renowned throughout the world. They include the Royal Botanic gardens at Kew and Edinburgh, and the natural history museum, where, yesterday in the presence of the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), I launched three publications on biodiversity. One of those publications was compiled by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre, another of our centres of excellence.

Mr. Dalyell : What is the educational element of the Darwin initiative? Will the fact that the Royal Botanic gardens in Edinburgh is to start an MSc course on biodiversity and tropical rain forests this October to be taken into account? Surely the directors of the institutions named should have been told about the initiative before it was launched rather than learning about it from the press.

Mr. Howard : My understanding is that they were informed. There may be some misunderstanding about what happened in relation to the Royal Botanic gardens at Edinburgh. My office attempted to communicate with the other institutions that I mentioned and, as far as I am aware, those attempts were successful. There may have been some misunderstanding in the case of Edinburgh.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the initiative will contain a large educational component, because we believe that that is an important way in which to take that initiative forward. The hon. Gentleman was present yesterday when I invited all those who think that they can play a significant and instructive part in taking it forward to get in touch with my Department so that we can assess the contribution that they can make. That applies as much to institutions in Edinburgh as to institutions anywhere in the country. I look forward to hearing from the institutions to which the hon. Gentleman referred so that we can make a proper assessment of the contribution that they can make.

The initiative will involve international studies of available natural resources, the development of inventories of the most important species and the promotion of

Column 405

exchange of information and techniques for conservation. The next step, which we are already taking, is to develop the initiative in consultation with interested public and private sector organisations, and it was in that context that I issued the invitation to which I referred.

In addition to the conventions, agreement was reached on the Rio declaration and on Agenda 21. The Rio declaration is a statement of principles, balancing environmental concerns with the need for development. Many of those principles will be familiar to hon. Members--the polluter pays and the precautionary principles, for instance. Equally importantly, the declaration endorses the need for citizen participation, for providing access to environmental information, and for the use of environmental impact assessment. We believe that all those principles are essential. The declaration also meets concerns of developing countries by underlining the link between poverty and environmental degradation, and acknowledging the sovereignty of states in environmental and development policies. It was accepted unanimously by all countries represented at Rio, and will provide a useful basis for common action in the years to come. Agenda 21, which was also agreed at the conference, provides a framework of action for everyone. It provides a flexible approach over 40 different subject areas for countries developing their own sustainable development programmes. A plan of action that is right for a small African state is unlikely to be appropriate for somewhere like Canada. That is why the flexible approach is so important. But sustainable development is not just something for Governments. It is for industry, for voluntary organisations, for local government, for scientists, for academics and for the individual. Agenda 21 aims to integrate environmental concerns into a wide range of policies. Among all those undoubted successes of Rio, I do have to report one disappointment. We had hoped to achieve a commitment to work towards a binding agreement on forests, but in the end we had to settle for a declaration on forest principles.

The inability to reach agreement does not reflect any lack of effort. The talks in which I was engaged went on well into the small hours, but in the end we had to recognise the need to draw up proposals with some degree of flexibility to meet the concerns of all states. Only last week, for example, the Indian Minister for the Environment emphasied to me the importance of forests as a source of firewood for cooking, apart from timber. Such concerns cannot be ignored.

However, the declaration lays down substantial undertakings, and it is the first international consensus on the value and conservation of the world's forests. That is not the end of the story, for the door remains open to a forest convention at a later date. The United Kingdom sponsors more than 200 forestry projects overseas at a cost of more than £160 million. We are pledged to continue that programme.

Mr. Dalyell : On 12 July, Mr. Ron Kemp and a delegation go to Malaysia. What is their brief? What do they hope to achieve? I accept that they could achieve a great deal.

Column 406

Mr. Howard : It is hoped to take forward the principles agreed in Rio. It is well known that Malaysia and India were the two countries which took the lead in opposing, for the type of reasons that I gave, a binding declaration. They took strong positions on those issues. In the end we were successful in obtaining their assent to the declaration of principles that was achieved at Rio, and it is important that we discuss with them the most constructive way in which that statement can be taken forward.

As anyone could have predicted, there was a great deal of debate in Rio on financial issues. Developing countries will need help, in different ways, if they are to achieve these new patterns of sustainable development. The single most important help that we can give is an improvement in the world trading system. We must have a successful conclusion of the Uruguay round of GATT if the economies of developing countries are to have the opportunities for growth that they need. And environment and trade are policies which must increasingly go hand in hand. That theme ran through the corridors of Rio.

The United Kingdom Government have led the way on debt relief. We have relieved developing countries of £1 billion of old aid loans since 1979 and we are urging the international community to build on a new set of Trinidad terms.

The United Kingdom will also mobilise its aid programme in support of the goals of Agenda 21. We are planning to make available substantial financial resources over the next few years to assist forestry conservation, biodiversity, energy efficiency, population planning and sustainable agriculture.

We fully support the global environment facility as the channel for assistance to meet the incremental costs arising from countries' commitments under the two new conventions. We have proposed a $2 billion to $3 billion replenishment of that facility and are committed to contributing our fair share. That share will depend on the final size of the replenishment and arrangements for sharing the burden among donors. We estimate that it will be about £100 million. That fulfils the pledge of new and additional resources for the GEF made by my predecessor in New York in March.

We are already playing our part in the provision of 3 billion ecu by the EC and its member states to strengthen assistance to developing countries in the field of sustainable development, particularly for funding Agenda 21.

It was very encouraging that we were able to reach so many agreements in Rio. But agreements alone are not enough. They must be translated into action, and that action must be monitored and reviewed. That was why the Earth summit agreed the establishment of the Sustainable Development Commission. That will pursue the follow-up to UNCED commitments and act as a forum for continuing discussion of sustainable development issues. It is crucial that Governments and United Nations organisations report periodically and publicly on implementation. Public confidence must be maintained and, to achieve that, we need the involvement of all types of non-governmental organisations--NGOs--business and the scientific community, as well as of local government.

The Government attach great importance to that monitoring process, which is why we have decided to convene a major global forum of the NGO community to examine and clarify their role in the practical implications

Column 407

of Agenda 21. We were in constant touch with NGOs during the preparations for Rio and were fortunate to have the expert knowledge of about a dozen NGO representatives as part of the United Kingdom delegation. We do not want to lose their input in this vital post- UNCED phase.

On his return from Rio, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister wrote to his European Community and G7 colleagues proposing the adoption of our action plan to carry forward immediately the agreements reached at Rio. We expect discussion of that initiative at the forthcoming Lisbon Council and Munich summit.

We propose that, at those meetings, leaders should make a political commitment to an eight-point plan for follow-up action by their countries by the end of 1993. That would include the publication of national plans for implementing the Rio declaration, Agenda 21, the forestry principles and the climate change convention, and action on biodiversity. It also includes taking the lead at the UN General Assembly in the establishment of the Sustainable Development Commission, putting our weight behind a review process for the forestry principles and giving financial support for the implementation of Agenda 21 through the Overseas Development Administration and for the replenishment of the global environment facility.

Mrs. Ann Taylor : What is the Secretary of State's view on the reporting mechanism to the United Nations Assembly with regard to the Sustainable Development Commission and progress? When the Minister for the Environment and Countryside was in Rio, he said that it would be totally unacceptable and that he would consider it a failure if the reporting mechanism were through the UN Economic and Social Council, which is exactly what was decided at the end. Since that is what has happened, what is the Secretary of State's position now?

Mr. Howard : It is fairly obvious that sustainable development will take place through the Sustainable Development Commission. Governments will report to that commission. We do not yet know exactly what form those reports will take, but it is interesting that, when I met the Indian Environment Minister last week, he suggested, quite unprompted, that the annual reporting system that we have introduced in this country in the past two years--it was originally introduced by Chris Patten--should form a model for international reporting on those agreements, which other nations might want to use. So he sees the merit of what we have been doing in this country and regards it as a potential model for the way forward in international reporting.

The Earth summit caught the attention of people throughout the world. It has caused an irreversible change in the perception of environmental issues and has placed the environment firmly on the political agenda.

Mr. Campbell-Savours : The Minister referred to relieving developing countries of £1 billion worth of official debt. Does that include debt incurred for the purchase of military equipment? The statistic may not be so relevant if that is the case.

Next Section

Home Page