Examination of witnesses (Questions 619
- 639)
TUESDAY 12 MAY 1988
GLENDA JACKSON,
MP, CBE,
MR JOHN
ADAMS and MR
IAN HARRIS
Chairman
619. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you for your memorandum which you sent to the Committee
which we were very glad to have and thank you also for coming
this morning. As you know, the Committee has taken to heart, if
I may say so, the Prime Minister's statement that sustainable
development and environmental protection will be at the heart
of Government policy making and we are seeking to establish what
machinery the Government is establishing to make sure that does
indeed become a reality. To that extent we have seen a number
of witnesses, including some of your colleagues, who are Green
Ministers in other departments. We are also very glad to see you,
the Green Minister in the crucial department in these terms, the
Department of the Environment, Transport and for the Regions,
and obviously we will be wanting to question you on your own role
as Green Minister for the Department, leaving perhaps rather wider
questions across the departments for your colleague, Michael Meacher
when he comes at approximately 11.30. So we are focusing on your
particular role. Is there anything you would like to say first?
(Glenda Jackson) First of all, may I say how delighted
I am to have been invited to appear in front of this Committee
and I am very interested that you have picked up so quickly, if
I may say so, on what is the central issue—the Government's
over-arching approach towards sustainable development and the
environment. I am accompanied this morning by Mr Adams who is
from the Sustainable Development Unit and also Mr Harris who is
Head of the Working Environment Division, both within my own department.
I think I might argue with you slightly on the issue that ours
is the "crucial" department because what is crucial
to the Government's policies is that all departments must be aware
of sustainable development when it comes to framing their own
policies, and the issue of greening across the whole of Government
is central to what we are attempting to do. The fact that the
Prime Minister co-ordinated the then separate departments of Environment
and Transport into one, which is now the Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Regions, and appointed the Deputy Prime Minister
as its head is an indication of not only of what I believe is
the imaginative approach but also the practical approach to what
Government is trying to achieve. Clearly, as Green Minister for
my own department, within the Committee of Green Ministers, it
could be argued—and perhaps I would—that I am in a
sense in a privileged position because there is really no division
between what are the policy making aspects of the Government and
the actual housekeeping aspects of the department itself. Ours
is not the only department which is concerned about the environment
and sustainable development. We are not exclusively the department
that has those considerations at the heart of its policy making.
Clearly there are others, but clearly there are other departments
where this would not be regarded as being central to their policy
making decisions. That is one of the great virtues, I would argue,
of the Green Ministers' Committee in as much as it is possible
for us to exchange news and views, if you like, quite apart from
the formal papers that are presented, so that we all in a sense
can develop our own awareness of what precisely we mean and the
contribution we can make towards achieving the essential policy
requirements.
620. Perhaps I should have substituted the
word "model" for "crucial". You know what
I mean.
(Glenda Jackson) I do indeed.
Mr Savidge
621. Can I perhaps pursue a few brief questions
really along much the same lines. Whether you prefer to regard
it as model or crucial, how far do you see your position as the
Green Minister in the environmental department as being in any
way different from other Green Ministers?
(Glenda Jackson) In its practical application
I do not believe that there is any great difference between my
being Green Minister in DETR or, say, Geoff Hoon being Green Minister
in the Lord Chancellor's Department if we are looking exclusively
at the housekeeping arrangements which are being put in place
across the whole of not only Whitehall but the much wider estate
which all departments have. If I can simply give you an example
of my department, in fact 80 per cent. of the staff of the Department
of the Environment, Transport and the Regions do not work within
the London HQ buildings; it is an estate that is spread all over
the country. Clearly on the housekeeping level it would be absurd
to pre-suppose that there is some finite set-in-stone formula
that is going to meet the kinds of green plans for each and every
one of those very variable outreach estates, although there can
be basic principles and local action plans. So on that level it
seems to me that, although our responsibilities within our departments
may be the same, there are possibly tradition and practice within
my department that makes it easier for me to pursue green housekeeping
than it may for Green Ministers in other departments, where this
issue of sustainable development, the environment, setting in
place practical green policies, has not been at the forefront
of the policy making decisions of that particular department.
On that level, of course, then I think we could be justifiably
regarded as being—well, to use the Chairman's phrase, not
models in a perfect sense but models in actually being able to
frame practices and procedures that can bring about what we wish
to see.
622. How do you see your role in the Green
Ministers' Committee in particular?
(Glenda Jackson) There is no division of responsibilities
within the Committee. All Green Ministers in that sense are equal:
no one has priority over another. There have been papers—I
have presented a paper on our green transport plans, for example,
but there will be other papers presented by other green ministers.
Essentially, as I said before, it is news, views, sharing of best
practice, ideas being presented which we all may think we know
about. If I can give you a precise example, at our second meeting
Joan Ruddock, who is the Minister for Women, raised the point
that she refuses to accept any letter to be signed if it is two
pages and the second page only has one line of print at the top.
Now that is a small, minor but very practical detail and underlines
what is part and parcel of what we should all be engaged in. That
is actually adopting much more practically perhaps than we may
think we do the whole culture of approaching how we do create
and build upon the idea of sustainable development and protection
of the environment on the 3Rs principle—reduce, reuse, recover.
623. While dealing with the matter of the
Green Ministers' Committee, this Committee understands that this
has been an initial year and it has taken time to get going, but
obviously there has been concern expressed that the Green Ministers'
Committee has only met twice in the first year. What are your
views on what the optimum number of meetings per year might be?
(Glenda Jackson) I would have hoped it would have
been possible for us to have met, say, possibly four times a year.
I must be honest with you here: I think we are all engaged in
a learning process and one of the most important first steps,
it seems to me, in the learning process that we are all undergoing
is being able to define—a checklist sounds much too simplistic,
a formula perhaps is a better word, to practically define what
precisely we mean and perhaps even more importantly to begin to
be able to define what are the desired outcomes and how we can
actually check on whether those are being delivered over a phased
process, over and above what clearly will be part and parcel of
the whole thrust of the Committee meeting and that is how there
can be even tighter linking up of policies across departments.
Again, if I can give an example of something which is within the
policy aspect of the department, we are looking at policies which
have to do with safe routes to school for children, attempting
to reduce the dependence of parents on having to take their children
to school by car. This clearly is a policy which links in with
the Departments of Health and Education. Though the policy creation
will obviously be conducted at the level of ministers making those
decisions, there are possibilities for using that as an example
within the Green Ministers' Committee for those departments that
may not, at first hand, believe their policies do in fact have
any linkage across. When you do have those discussions it is amazing
how many linkages there, in fact, are.
624. In relation to your own responsibilities,
have you been called on to report on your departments's performance
as far as environmental appraisal, operations or staff training
and awareness are concerned?
(Glenda Jackson) Not at this stage, no. What we
are in the process of doing is devising a rather more regular
programme of meetings with myself and the relevant heads of division
who deal with those particular issues, so that one can have an
actual programme of just checking, if you like, and saying "This
is what we shall be looking for at the end of this particular
period".
Mr Truswell
625. I do not want to put words into your
mouth, Minister, but from what you said a few minutes ago it seemed
to me you were not wholly clear of the role of the Green Minister
and you were perhaps seeking for a clearer definition of that.
Would that be fair, within the ambit of the Green Minister's Committee?
(Glenda Jackson) I certainly think within the
ambit of my own department—and I would have thought within
the ambit of all Green Ministers' own departments on a housekeeping
level—that is quite clear. But yes, I think you are right.
Within the ambit of the Green Ministers' Committee this is something
we are in the process of discovering. There is a potential there
for great energy and I think for an imaginative approach to problems
that sometimes may, in some instances, seem to be either insurmountable
or, on another level, not worth addressing. When I said that I
think this is a learning process I do believe that to be true
but one is learning it within a very good environment.
626. Would you see it as a priority test
for the role of the Green Ministers to be spelt out more clearly
and for the expectations placed upon you to be much more narrowly
defined, if you like?
(Glenda Jackson) Not necessarily because we are
not in a sense policy makers. The Committee does not make policy.
That is the preserve obviously for Cabinet. On the issue of opening
up, becoming more aware, of how policies are to be most effective
and to most efficiently deliver what is the central to those policies,
as a philosophy, the Committee does give us all the opportunity
to see how our policies in many instances can interlink and how
there may be ways of improving those interlinkings. It allows
us all to become more aware in a sense of those areas where our
policies, on the face of it—as I said it is much easier
for me in a sense coming from the department that I do but there
may well be an environmental disbenefit in a policy which, on
the face of it, has nothing whatever to do with environment or
sustainable development and I think that is one of the great values
and virtues of having such a committee even if it is only for
a colleague to say, "That is absolute rubbish; that has absolutely
no effect on my department; this policy is not effective in any
way"—not that any colleague would ever use such language,
as I am sure you are aware. But it is a forum which is not just
an empty talking shop (because Government policy in that sense
is quite clear) for us really to be able to see how we can deliver
across Government—which is a clear commitment of the Prime
Minister—of policies that do interact and can benefit each
from the other.
627. So is it fair to say that the Green
Ministers wait for policy and strategy to cascade down from above
rather than feeding back up into that process?
(Glenda Jackson) No. I would not have said that
was its priority at all, by virtue of the fact that you do have
in a room a representative of every Government department and
their remit is not exclusively on whatever is the particular policy
priority within their own department at that time, and I am sure
we are all aware of the kind of pressures people are under. It
is where those kind of bottom-up ideas, if you like, can actually
be placed on the table by virtue of again, acknowledging that
where one may presume that the border lines of policy are very
clearly defined and in a sense are cut off, when you are approaching
it from the perspective of a whole raft of policies based upon
the philosophy and the principles of sustainable development,
protection of and improvement of the environment, then those borders
begin to shift slightly - and in some instances rather more than
slightly.
628. You mention in paragraph 20 of your
memorandum that part of your responsibility as a Green Minister
is to report to Michael Meacher as chair of the Green Ministers'
Committee. You seemed to indicate you have not yet done that.
When do you anticipate doing that and what form will that take?
(Glenda Jackson) That is, again, dependent on
our formally setting in place my responsibilities actually within
the department. I have already touched on the fact that we are
attempting to set in train a rather more defined range of meetings
and exchanges and obviously in consultation with Michael I will
ask him when he, in effect, would like those kinds of reports
put up to him and also in what form he would like them to be—whether
he wants it actually in a direct, face-to-face plus hard copy
or, given the enormous pressures upon his time, whether he would
like it in some other form. But obviously these kinds of reports
will be available to the Committee.
Dr Iddon
629. In your 1998 annual report where there
is a statement of principles, we found it very surprising that
no commitment to green housekeeping is given amongst those principles.
Was that an omission? Could you comment on that?
(Glenda Jackson) It was an oversight and it was
in essence because there were organisational changes. There was
a breakdown in communication and that is why that was not actually
in the report. To learn from all experiences, that was a salutary
experience for us. It has meant we have had to review how we do
disseminate information and now we make more use of web sites
and the Internet, and actually patching that information in. I
assure you there will be no such oversight in the future.
630. On the question of the Comprehensive
Spending Review, could you tell us what you see as your role in
that? Are you monitoring the whole process and can you assure
us that the environment is a key consideration in that Comprehensive
Spending Review in your department?
(Glenda Jackson) The Deputy Prime Minister's approach
to the department and to the ministers within it and to everyone
including officials is that it is one department and therefore
he is punctilious in ensuring and assuring that ministers and
the relevant officials are all in one room when these discussions
are going on. There is no separation in that sense. Obviously
much of the detailed work which has to do with policy and which
has to do with defining budgets and projecting budgets for the
future are not done in that room but the actual arguments and
decisions are always taken within that. It is the whole department
engaged in those kinds of discussions.
Mr Dafis
631. May I ask you something about environmental
management systems and associated matters? I believe the department
has drawn up a model policy statement which has been now, I believe,
distributed to other departments and is to be published at some
stage. Could you tell us whether, in fact, the model policy and
improvement programme is the same as the operations strategy that
you have responsibility for as a Green Minister? Is it relevant
also to the policy making process and therefore the conduct of
environmental appraisals as well as operations? That is what we
are interested in: The connection between operations (which is
housekeeping) on the one hand and policy development on the other.
(Glenda Jackson) The model strategy for greening
operations is the one that Michael Meacher has put in place and
sent to all the other departments. This is the one we are talking
about here and the other departments are actively reading that.
I am not absolutely certain whether responses to it have been
received. That is essentially housekeeping but it is very difficult
to be precise as to where, given the areas we are discussing,
housekeeping ends and policy in the wider context begins as far
as this department is concerned given, as I have said, that the
thrust of Government's policy overall has to be based in essence
on the issues of sustainable development and environmental considerations.
632. I think we would regard housekeeping
and policy development as linked, of course, but nevertheless
the policy making process is enormously important and your department
is to provide a lead in that—or at least that is what we
assume. Could you tell us why in that case the model policy statement
does not, in fact, offer a way for other departments to develop
their policies? Do you not think it should do that?
(Glenda Jackson) No. As I have said earlier, policy
is defined by Cabinet across the whole raft of Government. Now
there are clearly departments where it is at the forefront of
their minds by virtue of the fact that policies are not deliverable
without considering environmental effects. If we simply look at
transport—and integrated transport policy is not deliverable
without clear consideration of those aspects which have to do
with land use planning and with the whole raft of environmental
issues—this may not be so clear cut as far as other departments
are concerned. The model document which you refer to underlines
the need for, in a sense, Government to lead by example as far
as housekeeping is concerned and we have spoken about the enormous
size of some of these houses as far as when we are looking at
the Government estate. On the definition of policy requirements,
clearly there is this remit which runs all across Government at
the very highest level, including Secretaries of State, that policies
must from here on in begin to be assessed taking proper account
of the costs and benefits for the environment, if that is appropriate
to the particular piece of policy—always bearing in mind
the overarching objective of sustainable development. Now where
I think it is possible for our department to be helpful in this
area is, as we are looking at a model for housekeeping, it should
be possible to devise a policy appraisal model which makes clear,
if you like, how the approach to sustainable development and environmental
considerations can be engaged in when for the department that
is concerned there may not, on the face of it, be any environmental
implications for that particular policy.
633. So the department is not offering any
kind of model to other departments in relation to, for example,
environmental appraisal—the appraisal of policies for the
effect on the environment, bearing in mind, of course, you have
the sustainable development unit in your department?
(Glenda Jackson) No. I am sorry, that is not the
case. Some of those particular expert divisions are in my department
but that kind of definition of the most effective way of engaging
in environmental appraisal is available to all departments; it
is there. I think what we should be looking at, in a sense, is
how we can make that practical in its application. I go back to
the word "checklist" in a sense, so that we do not get
lost in a great welter of words with no practical realisation
of what it is we are attempting to discover.
634. So the model policy statement does
not deal with that particularly—does not deal with the process
of suggesting to other departments how they should engage in the
appraisal of the environmental effect of their policies?
(Mr John Adams) Minister, if I could just come
in here, DETR, of course, has taken the lead in producing the
policy guidance and the appraisal document which came out last
month. That is a framework which is applicable to our department
but also, we hope, all departments and we do see it as our responsibility
to take the lead both in putting together those kinds of principles
by which environmental appraisals should be carried out and also
in providing practical help when other departments think they
need it of us. But environmental appraisal is a very broad field
and it is important that individual departments should also build
up their expertise and integrate that with the way in which they
are beginning to develop their policies.
635. Can I take you on to accreditation.
We understand that the Department of Environment, in fact, were
accredited to ISO 14001 back in 1996 and this was the first accredited
EMS actually within the Government. Now could you tell us something
about that? What do you think that accreditation in the department
covered, or what, in fact, did it cover? What did that accreditation
cover in your Department of Environment? Do you have any information
on that?
(Glenda Jackson) I think that sort of question
is probably better answered by Mr Harris who is Head of the Working
Environment Division.
(Mr Ian Harris) It covered essentially facilities
management of the headquarters buildings, office supplies and
office services. The key point about office supplies is that a
lot of the contracts are set up centrally for the supply of stationery,
furniture and office equipment. They are often set up as call
off contracts and are therefore available for use throughout the
department. So in essence it covered the main activities which
are important to greening operations centrally and within that
framework it looked at the issue of setting a policy statement
and then pulling together the systems by which that policy statement
was to be implemented through an effective planning mechanism,
effective documentation, effective record-keeping, effective communication
and effective training. What we were I suppose not clear about
before the first attempt was made within Government to go for
accreditation, was how much work was involved, what was the balance
between the costs and benefits that go in for this. So in a sense
it was a pilot and we intended to learn as we went along. What
we have been able to do over the last year is to extend that to
the new Working Environment Division and to the three core buildings
in central London— that is Ashdown House in Victoria Street,
Eland House and Great Minster House—and again it applies
to the supply of common products and services throughout the department.
636. It has been suggested to us all and
the information we had was that you were learning a little bit
about EMSs and that there were certain fundamental elements in
them that may not have been covered by the accreditation that
you obtained then. I have a list here of them: internal audit
covering environmental policy, co-ordination group, communications
strategy, reporting commitment—those are some of the elements
that are regarded as being fundamental to EMSs that may not have
been in that accreditation. Are you saying you were learning at
that time?
(Mr Ian Harris) The parameters were drawn so as
to be practicable and achievable so that, in terms of what the
system applied to and the process of accreditation—and this
is an independent process of evaluation so we have to satisfy
independent assessors—in terms of the parameters which were
laid down for the policy and the implementation we have actually
achieved that and we have a record of actually having achieved
that in running effective systems. The process of communication
is included, training is included and audit is included. One of
the key points in relation to the way that greening operations
have been developed within the department is to try to involve
representatives from headquarters' units by way of having a group
of green co-ordinators who comes together in a green team, so
as to involve staff. Although the process was a pilot and there
were clear parameters, there was no attempt to limit the message.
But the extent to which one could roll out the boundaries of the
management system is a matter for careful judgment.
637. Have you got any plans for introducing
EMSs through the new DETR taking it beyond what you have already?
(Mr Ian Harris) The aim is for the different property
centres within the department to look at what we have done, what
work is involved, how effective it has been, what are the changes
that result from actually having a management system and, equally,
within Government for other departments to look at us as a model
and to see that we have actually been able to put in place an
environmental management system. There had been concern. Was it
all going to be very bureaucratic? Was it going to take a lot
of effort? Would there be a real return for this? We have actually
proved it can be done. The point now is to provide knowledge and
understanding of that process throughout the department and other
departments, so that the different property centres within Government,
the different organisations or the different building management
regimes can consider whether it would be appropriate to go down
that route.
638. So you are not committed then yet to
introducing EMSs to other departments?
(Mr Ian Harris) We have a devolved property management
regime; we have 28 property centres. The key point is that an
environmental management system cannot be imposed from without—it
has got to be a commitment on the part of the managers of any
organisation or operational unit or building that they actually
want to go down this route and commit themselves to all the work
involved in it. The devolved property management structure applies
widely across Government so it is a question of blending that
local responsibility.
639. Are you saying that the department
as such cannot adopt a policy of introducing EMSs right across
the department?
(Mr Ian Harris) We would encourage other property
centres to look at what we have done and promote it. I cannot
take the decision for them because they have got the devolved
responsibility.
|
