Examination of witnesses (Questions 220
- 239)
TUESDAY 7 APRIL 1998
MR JOHN
SPELLAR, MP,
MR ARTHUR
RUCKER, MR
IAN ANDREWS
and MR ROBERT
COLES
220. The programme you referred to earlier
of trying to deal with these, what is your estimated timescale
for when that programme will be completed?
(Mr Spellar) Are we talking about the disposal
or the clearing up of sites?
221. You were saying earlier that you had
a programme—I think it was in answer to Mr Dafis' question—and
you were talking about fencing off and dealing with them so that
there was no longer any risk, and you said you were working your
way through that programme. I am just asking when you expect that
programme to be finished.
(Mr Spellar) My hesitation on this is because
some of this is ordnance which have been fired and therefore is
buried on various sites. To some extent, we may know where that
is and we then have to decide at what stage we actually dig that
up, or even whether it is prudent to dig that up on these sites.
That was my hesitation on that. With regard to the greater concentrations
where there was storage—— what is that?
(Mr Rucker) I do not think I can give a figure.
(Mr Spellar) I think we will have to send you
a note on that.
Dr Iddon
222. Inevitably the MoD must purchase a
considerable volume of hazardous chemicals in the course of a
year, are these monitored in any way? Could you inform us as to
whether the bulk of hazardous chemicals you use in a year is going
down?
(Mr Spellar) By hazardous chemicals, are we talking
about—if I may put it this way—straightforwardly poisonous,
or are we talking about ones which are covered by international
conventions such as CFCs, halons, PCBs and others?
223. I am talking about all of them.
(Mr Spellar) With regard to Montreal Conference
chemicals, we have an exemption in order to store sufficient to
enable us to maintain the use of certain equipment up until the
end of its life cycle, although we are looking for alternatives.
Therefore, obviously, those are very carefully monitored. With
regard to the use of, in that sense, ordinary industrial chemicals,
then we work under the Health & Safety Executive's regulations
and therefore operate as an ordinary industrial establishment
in that regard.
Joan Walley
224. Can I just be clear in respect of the
contamination in water in the Beaufort Dyke, that you will be
giving us a note about the environmental implications of that?
I am particularly aware that there are problems for the Isle of
Man. I realise that is not part of this country but I am very
conscious of the problems on both sides of the Beaufort Dyke.
(Mr Spellar) Yes, we will be sending you a note
on that.
Mr Truswell
225. Obviously we have had a wide-ranging
discussion and it acknowledges the impact which MoD activities
have on the environment generally. Why is it then that in the
Department's Statement of Aims and Objectives there is very little
reflection of environmental concerns?
(Mr Spellar) I think it is the point you make,
that this impacts right the way across our operations, that we
have such an enormous range of activities, and we incorporate
environmental considerations into each of those and therefore
that is part of our on-going business procedure. I think it would
be fair to say that the environmental considerations impact more
on our operations now than they did in the past, as both public
perceptions, public consciousness and indeed scientific knowledge
have advanced. We can see this with regard, for example, to contamination,
and some of the contamination which has taken place in the past
which we have as a legacy is not something which would happen
under current procedures.
226. Would you not, as the Green Minister,
want to see those explicit environmental concerns referred to
in the Department's aims and objectives? Surely it is a kind of
shop front for what you are about?
(Mr Spellar) As I say, that is what we do in the
course of all of our operations. The prime objective is the maintenance
of the defence forces of the country, and we ensure that that
is consistent, wherever we can, with broader environmental objectives
as well.
227. You did refer now some time ago to
targets for energy efficiency, and of course that is laudable,
but from my scrutiny of the documents you have provided it appears
to be the only area where you have specific targets. You have
many objectives but the only target we have been able to identify
relates to energy efficiency.
(Mr Spellar) It is easier to quantify!
228. Yes, but we are not talking about that
which is easy to measure. You then went on to talk about water.
Does that imply that you are beginning to examine the need for
targets across a wider range of issues, not just energy but maybe
water, land, conservation? Is this the start of a process maybe
of being seen to identify not only where you want to get to but
how you are going to get there?
(Mr Spellar) You are talking about use of water
here I think?
229. I am merely making a general point
about setting yourself targets. It is one thing to have objectives,
we can all have objectives, and it was said earlier that we can
be very pious in the setting of objectives, but targets are things
by which you can ultimately be judged. As far as I am aware, you
only have a target relating to energy.
(Mr Spellar) Certainly with water we are looking
at reduction of use of water where possible, particularly with
the inherited estate and the leaking of pipes there. I think it
would be fair to say that we are starting to get a grip of that
particular area and indeed we are putting some of our work out
to a number of water companies and drawing on their expertise
precisely in order to be able to achieve that objective, which
is obviously also in line with the objectives of Government. With
regard to energy, it is much easier with energy where you have
something which is readily quantifiable. In other areas you do
have to work, I would suggest, more in terms of objectives, but
where you can start to refine your process of evaluation that
is important, that is why I described the use of the training
estate where we are looking at refining the mechanisms by which
we assess our training estate need and the extent to which we
utilise and therefore what areas of land we require in order to
fulfil our training objectives. So we are looking at refining
that area and will be over the course of the next year or so.
230. You appreciate our difficulty, Minister,
if you do not set yourself targets it is difficult to say whether
you have achieved them or not.
(Mr Spellar) That is true, but equally you must
recognise our difficulty in that in many of these areas we are
looking at a number of balanced objectives, even in some cases
I would say, balanced environmental objectives. Therefore just
setting some simple mathematical formula may not actually enable
us to make the best decisions either. We have to look at that
side as well.
231. If you could pursue that process it
at least gives us an opportunity to see that the thinking is taking
place.
(Mr Andrews) We have been looking recently at
how we can improve our record on water use, for example, and we
have issued guidance across the Department on best practice and
are moving towards more metering, and that would enable target-setting
to be possible. If I could pick up the point on a specific commitment
to the environment, we do explicitly make clear that conservation
is our second priority but only after the needs of military training
in our rural estate; and military training is of course the reason
we have it at all. We have placed a very high priority on conservation,
and indeed in terms of targets we are seeking to put in place
integrated management plans for every one of our designated sites
on the defence estate, of which there are some 250 Sites of Special
Scientific Interest, and our target is to have management plans
in place for all those by the end of 2000. So there is a target
for you!
(Mr Coles) We also have other targets which apply
anyway, and Montreal Protocol substances is a case in point, where
we are meeting the targets.
Joan Walley
232. If I may, I would like to turn to the
detail of procurement policy and ask how you do actually check
whether or not your purchases are in accordance with the policy
requirements as far as procurement is concerned?
(Mr Spellar) Sorry, what do you mean, "how
we check"?
233. How you check. Let us take the example
of Brazilian mahogany. I understand that Friends of the Earth
have alleged that the Brazilian logging company which supplied
the company which imported 204 cubic metres of mahogany for the
MoD had taken thousands more tonnes of mahogany from Brazilian
forests than it was legally entitled to under authorisations from
the Brazilian environment agency. If that allegation could be
proved, what I would like to know is how your policy in respect
of this particular purchase actually went through the hoops of
checking on the environmental performance? Why did you actually
need those 200 cubic metres of Brazilian mahogany?
(Mr Spellar) Because it was an extremely appropriate
wood for what we wanted. Do not forget we are dealing often with
vessels which are quite old and therefore this was the most appropriate
for them. We also got the appropriate certificates from the company
who supplied in this country, who had got them from the company
in Brazil, that this was actually from sustainable sources. As
you rightly say, some other organisations have questioned that
claim. They have put in some evidence to us and we are now looking
into that. But we actually have a system within the Department,
firstly obviously to ensure we comply with environmental legislation,
and then also project approval must be preceded by an environmental
impact assessment.
234. So you are saying you had procedures
to check that out before Friends of the Earth brought their concerns
to your attention, or was it because they brought their concerns
to your attention that you then checked it out?
(Mr Spellar) We would have required the actual
certificates from the importers and also from the company that
was supplying, and we would have asked the importers to have ensured
that the company supply was reputable in this respect.
235. So there is a suggestion that that
certificate was actually fraudulently given?
(Mr Spellar) The people who have been making the
complaint on this have been in correspondence with the Procurement
Executive in order that that can be assessed.
Joan Walley: Was there
an alternative to mahogany considered for the refurbishment which
was being considered?
Mr Loughton: What
was it used for?
Joan Walley
236. Why did you need the mahogany?
(Mr Spellar) This is for replacement within some
of the fixtures and fittings, as I understand it.
237. What sort of fixtures and fittings?
(Mr Spellar) We will send you a note on that!
238. I would be very interested to see a
note on that. Finally, if I may, have you now got new checks of
licences supporting the supply of tropical timber?
(Mr Spellar) The first thing is we are going to
evaluate the questions which have been raised, and then if we
find that the system is not working properly we will have to review
that. The key thing is, in an organisation of this size you have
to develop the appropriate system which then provides the checks.
If you find that is breaking down, then you have to review your
system.
239. I think we have talked about this in
the contribution Mr Truswell was making in terms of having those
performance indicators, but you will be letting us have a note
on what the mahogany was used for?
(Mr Spellar) Yes.
(Mr Rucker) I think before we leave the question
of procurement, if I may, and I apologise if you are coming on
to other questions, we have been focussing here on one particular
incident which is obviously a very unfortunate one, but the main
point we would want to lay before your Committee is that we have
a system, and we have had for some little while actually, where
all projects above £15 million have project approval submissions
which must contain environmental impact assessments.
| 
