---

Mr. Atkins: It will hardly come as a surprise to the Opposition that I must ask the House to reject new clauses 1, 19 and 27. I should be happy to cover our record in detail, but perhaps at this stage in our intended discussions hon. Members would not want me to, and it would probably be unwise to do so. However, our record amply demonstrates our commitment to make progress on environmental integration and assessment.

Quite complex issues requiring careful judgments are often raised, and the new clauses would be of little practical value in improving on existing arrangements, but

---

Column 722

we are not content to rest on our laurels-- we intend to consider how we can give added vigour to current arrangements. Each Department already has a green Minister--

Mr. Andrew F. Bennett (Denton and Reddish): The Minister will be aware that the Secretary of State told the Environment Select Committee on 17 May that he hoped that the green Ministers would meet about four times a year, but then admitted that they had not met for seven months. Have they met since then? When does the Minister expect them to meet again?

Mr. Atkins: We have met twice this year and we shall meet again in July. Unlike the Labour party, which has an obsession with meeting and planning behind closed doors, we meet daily as and when matters affect our respective Departments. It is nonsense to suggest that the fact that we have had only two meetings during the year demonstrates a lack of commitment. Whenever issues related to environmental activity arise in the course of various Departments' business, Ministers have a view to express, and they do so bilaterally and multilaterally. That is the sensible way to do things, rather than holding formal meetings.

Ms Ruddock: Did the green Ministers discuss at their meeting the proposal to dump the Brent Spar in the Atlantic?

Mr. Atkins: The hon. Lady must not be mischievous.

Ms Ruddock: The Minister accused the Labour party of meeting behind closed doors. Surely he would not want to be accused of doing the same.

Mr. Atkins: Our meetings are held on a regular basis in the course of the process of government. That does not necessarily require a full turnout of every green Minister every time. The hon. Lady asked about Brent Spar. As she well knows, that is a matter for the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the President of the Board of Trade. It is clear that they are the Departments whence the decisions emanated. When the matter was discussed, my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade told the House exactly what he thought about the situation, and I have nothing to add to that.

I remind the House that it is a long-established part of Government policy that the effects on the environment of existing and proposed policies need to be examined systematically. We committed ourselves formally to doing so in our White Paper, "This Common Inheritance", and we restated and carried forward our thinking in our 1994 sustainable development strategy. We have a green Minister in every Department, whose job it is to ensure that environmental considerations are integrated into the strategies and policies of Departments--a day-to-day responsibility, as opposed to the collective meetings of which I have already said a little.

The hon. Lady made great play of the fact that we have not made a great song and dance about the documents that we have produced. I remind the House that they include "Policy Appraisal and the Environment" in 1990 and "Environmental Appraisal in Government Departments" in 1994, which added to the economic appraisal that has been available for some time in the Treasury Green Book.

I am sure that the hon. Lady will accept that those documents are not everybody's bedtime reading, however important they may be to the process of government. It is

---

Column 723

in the process of government and within the corridors of power that the booklets have been read, and their influence there has been substantial. To suggest that that is not important seems a little shortsighted to me.

Ms Ruddock: The Minister misunderstands my point. The "Green Housekeeping" report, which I have read, did not seem to have the same Government publicity machine behind it on publication as many other documents. If the Government are serious about integrating environmental considerations into the whole of Government policy, surely they ought to take the public with them. That is the key. The Government should encourage public understanding, information and support for such strategies, and I suggest that they have not done so.

Mr. Atkins: The hon. Lady will recall that, when we discussed the matter in Committee, I made it clear that although we were pushing as hard as we could within the Government estate to be aware of all that should and can be done by various Departments, we did not always meet every objective. Being a reasonable person, she will understand that there are always pressures and difficulties that prevent our achieving some objectives. Some areas are better than others, and some are worse.

A lot of work remains to be done, and my Department, the Secretary of State and I are doing it. The documents to which the hon. Lady refers have been given publicity. They might not have aroused the amount of interest in the tabloids that we might have wished for but, in practice, they have been circulated, there is a lot of interest in them and they have had a lot of effect. It is, therefore, unfair to suggest that they have not done what we anticipated.

Mr. Jon Owen Jones (Cardiff, Central): The Minister will be aware that, last year, his Department published planning policy guidance No. 13 on out-of-town retail developments. One of the reasons for the change was environmental consideration--reducing the number of cars on our roads travelling out of town to shop. Although he claims that Departments co- operate and are integrated, that planning policy guidance document has not yet been published in Wales and does not yet apply there. How, then, can he claim that the Government have an integrated policy and that Departments co -operate and work closely together?

5.30 pm

Mr. Atkins: I said that nothing in this world is perfect. There might be areas of weakness that we need to deal with, and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for drawing the House's attention to an area that might need more pressure than it has had to date. I shall convey that message to my colleagues who are responsible for planning matters in the Department, although I am sure that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Croydon, Central (Sir P. Beresford), will have something to say on those matters--if he feels so inclined--later.

I have tried to deal with the concerns that have been raised. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Deptford for the terms in which she moved the new clause and the speed with which she moved it. As I said, however, we cannot accept new clause 1 and I therefore ask the House to reject it.

---

Column 724

Ms Ruddock: I simply wish to put it on record that, yet again, the Government have said that they believe in, and seek to do all that is embodied in, the new clause, the requirement of which is extremely simple--to have on the statute book a responsibility to integrate environmental considerations into areas of public policy making. The Opposition can have no confidence that the Government follow, or intend to follow, that path if they are not prepared to have it enshrined in statute. We know from what has happened during the passage of the Bill--we suspect that it is why the Government will not accept the new clause--that, behind the scenes, muchof the Government's commitment to environmental sustainability is challenged by commercial and private interests to which they subscribe and which they seek not to offend.

We believe that environmental considerations must be at the heart of all Government policies. We regret that the Government, who are so keen on cost compliance assessments, do not believe that the same consideration that is given to private financial concerns should be given to the enhancement of the environment.

Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:--

The House divided: Ayes 232, Noes 262.

Division No. 177] [5.33 pm

AYES

---

Column 724

Abbott, Ms Diane

Adams, Mrs Irene

Ainger, Nick

Ainsworth, Robert (Cov'try NE)

Allen, Graham

Alton, David

Anderson, Donald (Swansea E)

Armstrong, Hilary

Ashdown, Rt Hon Paddy

Austin-Walker, John

Barnes, Harry

Barron, Kevin

Battle, John

Bayley, Hugh

Beckett, Rt Hon Margaret

Bell, Stuart

Benn, Rt Hon Tony

Bennett, Andrew F

Bermingham, Gerald

Berry, Roger

Betts, Clive

Blunkett, David

Boateng, Paul

Bradley, Keith

Bray, Dr Jeremy

Brown, Gordon (Dunfermline E)

Brown, N (N'c'tle upon Tyne E)

Burden, Richard

Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V)

Campbell-Savours, D N

Cann, Jamie

Carlile, Alexander (Montgomery)

Chidgey, David

Chisholm, Malcolm

Church, Judith

Clapham, Michael

Clarke, Eric (Midlothian)

Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)

Clelland, David

Clwyd, Mrs Ann

Coffey, Ann

Cohen, Harry

---

Column 724

Cook, Robin (Livingston)

Corbett, Robin

Corbyn, Jeremy

Corston, Jean

Cousins, Jim

Cunningham, Jim (Covy SE)

Cunningham, Rt Hon Dr John

Dafis, Cynog

Dalyell, Tam

Davidson, Ian

Davies, Bryan (Oldham C'tral)

Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

Denham, John

Dewar, Donald

Dixon, Don

Dobson, Frank

Donohoe, Brian H

Dowd, Jim

Eagle, Ms Angela

Eastham, Ken

Etherington, Bill

Evans, John (St Helens N)

Fatchett, Derek

Field, Frank (Birkenhead)

Fisher, Mark

Flynn, Paul

Forsythe, Clifford (S Antrim)

Foster, Rt Hon Derek

Foster, Don (Bath)

Foulkes, George

Fraser, John

Fyfe, Maria

Galbraith, Sam

Galloway, George

Gapes, Mike

Garrett, John

Gerrard, Neil

Godman, Dr Norman A

Golding, Mrs Llin

Gordon, Mildred

Graham, Thomas

Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)

Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)

Grocott, Bruce

---