GREENING GOVERNMENT REPORT
Leadership and institutions (continued)
Support for the sustainable development agenda
32. The Sustainable Development Unit (SDU) exists
as an inter-departmental resource to promote the sustainable development
agenda. It is located within DETR although the Labour Party in
opposition had spoken of it being within the Cabinet Office with
seconded 'high fliers' from all departments.[33]
Mr Prescott told us that the remit of the newly created department
and his own position as Environment Secretary and Deputy Prime
Minister with responsibility for the Initiative made DETR the
logical place for the unit to be.[34]
We doubt whether a Cabinet Office location would necessarily be
any improvement in the light of the factors identified by Mr Prescott.
33. However, the location need not be set in stone
and in the light of changing circumstances this may need to be
reviewed. The importance of bringing concern for the environment,
and an understanding of the sustainable development framework,
out of any environmental ghetto and into the ownership of all
departments cannot be understated. It is for this reason that
we recommend a programme of secondments to the SDU, from across
Whitehall, and even from outside government, to bring additional
skills and experience to the unit increasing its ability to act
as a genuine pan-governmental resource.
34. Lord Tope from the London Borough of Sutton stressed
to us that leadership must be evident from both politicians and
officers. In Sutton environmental objectives are reflected in
the Council's performance management system and the personal performance
objectives of every officer from the Chief Executive down. In
addition they have a "Green Team" of experts who are
located in their Environmental Services Department but are regarded
as a corporate resource.[35]
Green Ministers' memoranda all described their departmental arrangements
and resources for supporting the Green Minister. Some have central
units and MOD described a very formal structure with committees,
networks and focal points across the department.[36]
Other Green Ministers relied on input from policy and operations
staff across their department. We were concerned that only one
department, the Treasury, highlighted the role of the Permanent
Secretary in taking responsibility for the department's environmental
strategy.[37] We consider
that Green Ministers need adequate support and that to take forward
the new Sustainable Development Strategy in an active way they
are likely to need a formal network of staff. We recommend
that Permanent Secretaries should be given formal responsibilities
for supporting their Green Minister and delivering effective environmental
appraisal of policy and improvements in green housekeeping.
Devolving responsibility for
sustainable development
35. The Government is pursuing a policy of devolution
involving development agencies for the regions; a national assembly
for Wales; a parliament for Scotland; and a new form of government
for London. The relevant proposals are significant in themselves
and as early evidence of how the Government interprets sustainable
development.
The Regional Development Agencies
36. The creation of Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs) is a major plank in the Government's approach to development
in the UK. Consistency and coherence between central government
and the regional offices, the RDAs and local government will be
important in the task of making that development sustainable.
We have received evidence of a number of concerns about the legislative
and other proposals for the Agencies.[38]
Our main concern is that the Government's own commitments to sustainable
development do not appear to be well embodied in the Bill which
was before the House of Lords in mid-June 1998 while this report
was being prepared.
37. The Bill does not give the RDAs an over-arching
objective to achieve sustainable development but instead presents
sustainable development as one purpose alongside others to: further
economic development and regeneration; promote business efficiency,
investment and competitiveness; promote employment; and enhance
the development and application of skills relevant to employment.
In correspondence to the Committee, Mr Prescott said that this
provided the right balance between the RDAs' objectives and would
have the effect of ensuring that RDAs are required to take a coherent
and sustainable approach to all aspects of their work. He said
that making sustainable development the primary purpose of RDAs
"would have made them fundamentally different bodies, and
would have distorted [the Government's] intentions. Their primary
role is economic development."[39]
38. We are concerned about the way in which RDAs
may interpret their priorities in the light of the way their statutory
objectives have been formulated and a number of witnesses have
made similar points.[40]
We welcome the requirement for RDAs to formulate and keep under
review a strategy in relation to their purposes. This should ensure
that their interpretation of their purposes is made clear. However,
we note also that local authority witnesses were concerned about
the likelihood that RDA and local government strategies would
sit alongside each other rather than being organised in a hierarchical
structure and that this may lead to incoherence.
39. We consider that, in the light of the debate
about the purposes of the RDAs, the Secretary of State will need
to give guidance to the RDAs, for which there is provision in
the Bill, clarifying the nature of their sustainable development
responsibilities. We welcome Mr Prescott's intention to work with
interested organisations to develop such guidance.[41]
40. However, we would not regard the use of the
term "sustainable development" as a distortion of the
intention to further the economic development of the regions.
We believe the Government's commitment to sustainable development
means that sustainability sets the bounds within which economic
development should take place. We would appreciate clarification
of the fundamental differences that the Government appears to
see between the pursuit of economic development and the pursuit
of sustainable development.
The National Assembly for Wales
41. The formulation for the National Assembly for
Wales taking sustainable development into account is somewhat
different. The principal requirements in the Government of Wales
Bill are that "The Assembly shall make a scheme setting out
its proposals for securing that its functions are exercised with
due regard to the principle that sustainable development should
be promoted" and that each financial year "the Assembly
shall publish a report of how its proposals as set out in the
scheme were implemented". In addition, consultation on the
scheme and its periodic review and publication are also provided
for.
42. We received little evidence on the efficacy of
this framework and we of course recognise the constitutional differences
between a system of regional development agencies and the establishment
of an elected national assembly and the consequent difficulties
in drawing any comparisons. We welcome the all-embracing scope
of the provisions with regard to the Assembly as well as the references
to reporting and consultation. We look forward to the Assembly's
commencement and to the implementation of these provisions. We
welcome the plans of the Welsh Office to hold a national conference
on sustainable development in the lead up to the establishment
of the Assembly.
43. The memorandum from the Welsh Office Green Minister,
Mr Win Griffiths, MP, referred to the contribution of the Welsh
Office to the current revision of the Sustainable Development
Strategy and said that once this was in place it would fall to
the National Assembly for Wales to set out and report on its own
strategies and plans to promote sustainable development in Wales.[42]
The system of schemes and reports for Wales will need to be compatible
with the revised strategy for the UK and any reporting arrangements
established thereon.
The Scottish Parliament
44. For completeness we make reference to the establishment
of the Scottish Parliament and executive. The constitutional context
of the proposals for Scotland makes any further comparison impossible
in advance of that institution beginning its work. The relevant
legislation does not contain analogous provisions being entirely
enabling. Important questions remain as to how far any Sustainable
Development Strategy will be applicable to the whole UK but these
need to await further developments and are beyond the scope of
the evidence before us. We were however, delighted with the aim
of the Scottish Office as spelt out in the memorandum of its Green
Minister and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Lord Sewell:
"Within the framework of government policies, and across
the programmes for which the Secretary of State is responsible,
the aim of the Scottish Office is: to create an environment in
which the public and private sectors work together to improve
the economic, social and environmental conditions in which people
of Scotland live and work. In effect, this means that the aim
of the Scottish Office is the sustainable development of Scotland".[43]
We commend this formulation to the new Scottish Parliament and
executive, and government as a whole, as a well-articulated example
of a high level strategic aim.
Local government
45. The importance of local government in pursuing
sustainable development was recognised at the UN General Assembly
Special Session on Sustainable Development, the 'Earth Summit'
in 1992, by the inclusion of a chapter within Agenda 21 devoted
to the subject. Since the end of 1992 local authorities in the
UK have been taking this forward through Local Agenda 21 initiatives.
46. The Committee heard that many local authorities
have made great strides in incorporating sustainable development
issues into their policies and operations. Mr Prescott told us
that over 50 per cent of authorities have signed up to Local Agenda
21.[44] In addition representatives
from the Local Agenda 21 Steering Group told us that nearly 50
per cent of authorities were formally committed to introducing
environmental management systems or were currently examining their
feasibility.[45] We were
pleased with the recognition the Government has given to the importance
of local government through relaunching the Local Agenda 21 drive
and through the Prime Minister challenging all local authorities
to have strategies in place by 2000.[46]
We also welcome the incorporation within the Opportunities for
Change consultation paper on the revised Sustainable Development
Strategy of the theme 'promoting sustainable communities' where
local government clearly will be at the sharp end of delivery.
47. We were told that putting Local Agenda 21 on
to a statutory footing might well 'kill the goose that lays the
golden egg'.[47] However,
we note that the Government is likely to be bringing forward legislation
for local authorities in the medium term including a new duty
to promote the economic, social and environmental well-being of
their areas. We recommend that the Government consult local
authorities on whether to establish a statutory duty for local
government throughout the UK to develop Local Agenda 21 strategies
for sustainable development.
48. We heard some criticism from Sutton and the LA21
Steering Group on the way central government consulted local government
which contrasted unfavourably with the way local government consulted
its own communities.[48]
The Steering Group felt that as part of the machinery of government
with unique experiences and abilities to exert influence it was
unfortunate that central government kept local government in the
anteroom of policy development rather than offering a seat at
the 'table of influence'.[49]
We believe that sustainability needs to be clearly incorporated
into other policy initiatives affecting local government, such
as the criteria for Best Value, so that there are no inconsistencies
in the expectations placed on local government.
The Advisory Bodies
49. There are now a large number of bodies advising
the Government on sustainable development from a number of perspectives.
The special features of these bodies are that the Royal Commission
on Environmental Pollution produces in-depth studies of important
issues; the Government Panel establishes forward priorities; the
Round Table builds consensus and the Advisory Committee on Business
and the Environment (ACBE) enables dialogue between government
and business. In addition the Government recently established
the Sustainable Development Education Panel and a similar body
for trades unions. While these bodies' remits extend to the UK
there is a further analogous body in Scotland, the Advisory Group
on Sustainable Development, but no such body in Wales.
50. We had an extremely useful informal meeting with
members of the Royal Commission, Panel and Round Table early in
the year as a preliminary to our work. In this formal inquiry
we examined the Chairman of ACBE, Mr David Davies of Johnson Matthey
plc, and colleagues. We invited assessments of the Government's
responses from the Panel and the Round Table (the newer bodies
have yet to get underway). Mr Davies told us that ACBE represents
larger businesses. This reinforced our concern that small and
medium sized enterprises may not be adequately represented on
the advisory bodies.
51. Our interim conclusion is that the advisory arrangements
are working well. In many cases the Government responds promptly
to the advice that it has sought. But in the past there have been
some exceptions to this, notably prolonged delays in responding
to some of the reports of the Royal Commission on Environmental
Pollution.[50] We
recommend that the Government should commit itself to responding
to all reports from its advisory bodies on environmental and sustainable
development issues within a specified number of months. We would
suggest three months in general, and six months for the more detailed
Royal Commission reports. We have not fully examined the quality
of the Government's responses or the action taken thereafter.
We note with interest the Round Table suggestion that this kind
of monitoring could be a useful role for the Committee, and we
shall pursue this further in future inquiries.
Conclusion
52. Reviewing the Government's leadership as a
whole, our central conclusion is that while the stated intentions
are admirable, there appears to be some failure to grasp the overarching
nature of sustainable development and apply it. There needs to
be further strengthening of government mechanisms and a greater
commitment to high level championing. The Government's commitment
to sustainable development should be set out in clear and consistent
language in the aims and objectives of new bodies and new policies
and reflected in the aims and objectives of existing government
machinery and policies when revisited and relaunched.
33 In
trust for tomorrow, Report of the
Labour Party Environment Policy Commission to the 1994 Party Conference. Back
34 Q5 Back
35 QQ430
and 446 Back
36 Ev p
60, Q2 Back
37 Ev p
373 B5(a) Back
38 Ev pp181
and 325 Back
39 Ev pp396
and 397 Back
40 QQ296
and 503 Back
41 Ev p397 Back
42 Ev p383 Back
43 Ev p390
paragraphs 1 and 2 Back
44 Q38 Back
45 Q492
and Annex 1 Back
46 Address
by the Prime Minister to the special session of the UM General
Assembly on Sustainable Development, June 1997 Back
47 Q491 Back
48 Ev pp166
and 167, paragraphs 8 and 9 and p185, paragraph 8 Back
49 Ibid Back
50 See,
for example, the Fifth Report and the Eighteenth Report Back
| 
