Examination of witnesses (Questions 120
- 139)
TUESDAY 23 JUNE 1998
SIR ANDREW
TURNBULL, MR
JOHN BALLARD,
MR BRIAN
LEONARD and MR
RICHARD HILLIER
120. So when you have got the 1998-99 plans,
on the last line, you plan to spend up to the £650,000 mark
again; is that likely to prove accurate?
(Mr Leonard) We are still looking at that, and
it may be that is an overestimate.
121. Thank you. Could I just turn briefly
to the evidence that the Minister told the main Committee in October
1997, about the Sustainable Development indicators, and he indicated,
as I am sure you will recall, that he wanted to introduce a much
simplified system, and he actually said he wanted to introduce
"half a dozen or eight which have real salience with the
public consciousness." Now your Annual Report, on page 82,
says that you are planning to publish a "comprehensive core
set of sustainable development indicators." Does that match
up with the Minister's expectation that it will be a very small
number, and how are you planning to do that?
(Mr Leonard) There are two streams of work here.
First, there is the broad range or comprehensive set, on which
work began in 1996, and that is being carried forward. There is
a series of working groups which the Department chairs, involving
other Government Departments, outside experts, local authorities,
many, many bodies with an interest. We are expecting to have that
set of indicators ready for the publication of the National Sustainable
Development Strategy, which I referred to earlier, around the
end of the year is when we are hoping to produce that, about 150
indicators are likely to produce there. In addition, as you say,
Ministers have said that they feel that such a range of indicators,
valuable though it is, could be assisted in its impact if there
were a small number of indicators which were more accessible,
more publicly accessible, and so in parallel with that, close
parallel, the same people are involved, we have been working on
what such a set of indicators should be, how many they should
be. There has been a lot of consultation with outside interests,
there was a major seminar of experts in May, which met to discuss
what they should be, there is currently consultation, as part
of the Sustainable Development Strategy, about this, a wide range
of interests, including the media, have offered comments, anyone
is very, very welcome to offer comments about what they think
those indicators will be. The purpose is not to supplant the comprehensive
set, which is, if you like, the truer picture of the whole field,
it is to select indicators which between them reasonably represent
the sense of progress, or lack of it, in the environmental and
sustainable development area. It is much more complex than it
sounds; quite apart from choosing the right subject, on which,
for example, the May seminar focused, there are such factors as
how far is the data available, when is it available, and how far
is it susceptible to other technical analyses, all of which are
being looked at, at the moment.
122. So do you think you are going to be
able to get down to the Minister's suggested number, when he spoke
to this Committee?
(Mr Leonard) He can tell us that he wants us to
get down to the number, and we shall get down to the number, yes.
Christine Butler
123. Do the Department have an overall research
strategy?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Let me deal with that. It
does not have a view that it is appropriate to spend X per cent
or X million on research, it spends something like, together with
its NDPBs, about £130 million. This is research which various
Directorates commission, in order to underpin the policy work;
and the test of whether something goes ahead is whether it contributes
to the improvement of policy work or whether it does not, not
whether there is a research budget that has to be spent, or some
target. So the amount we spend on research in the transport field
is not limited or influenced by what we choose to spend, for example,
in the environmental field.
124. Perhaps we could come to budgets later,
but, in terms of policy, does the strategy adequately reflect
new policy?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Yes, but it is done, in
a sense, at a disaggregated level. If the Regeneration Directorate
wants to know the effectiveness of our regeneration initiatives,
in order to recast and target them better, it will set up a research
project to deal with that; if we want to know something about
the case for an aggregates tax, we want to know how the aggregates
market works, what the impact might be, they will commission the
necessary research. But it is done in relation to each policy
objective. What is dealt with across the piece is, there is a
review which the Chief Scientist undertakes each year to look
at methodologies and principles, is this research being conducted
according to various principles of best practice; the Chief Scientist
is not saying, "I think you should be spending more on Transport
and less on the Environment."
125. Who does decide then, because it seems
a little bit fragmented, if research is bound to each division
within the Department, but you did say at the very beginning that
there was an overall strategy?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) The strategy is that we
procure the research we need, in order to pursue our various policy
objectives.
126. How do you decide overall who gets
what share——
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) We do not decide overall.
127. There is no decision at all?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) That is the whole point.
There is no budget which says, if someone in the regeneration
field wants to put forward a proposal for additional research,
that money is assessed in relation to other initiatives in the
regeneration area, they do not go to a central budget which says,
"I want more money for regeneration research" and that
means there will be less for environment research. The competition
for funds is, over the various ways of spending money in the pursuit
of our regeneration objective, what part does research play in
that; we are not trading off the development of research into
motorway tolling against research into the countryside, or minerals
planning, or whatever.
128. How do you stop the budget for research
rising extraordinarily then?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Because they only buy research
if it is justified in relation to the policy aim that it is supporting.
129. What about current, or older, research
that has been put into a programme earlier, and in the light of
new policy seems not to be required?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Almost all our research
is related to specific projects, specific contracts, and when
that work is done that work ends and then you decide whether to
take it forward; so there is not an ongoing programme that might
be being spent and not being adequately challenged.
130. Is a view taken of the cost of research
between divisions; for instance, there is some £26.7 million
being spent on construction research, and £1.3 million on
countryside and wildlife research?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) This comes about because
the construction sector has decided that it can justify purchasing
£26 million of research.
131. But can the Department justify these
different heads, these different budget, across divisions; is
there no-one saying, yourself saying, "Well, hang on a minute,
there's a lot of research that is justified within that division,
and this is justified within that division", but in terms
of the overall and overarching objectives of the Department?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Yes. We do not go to, the
centre does not go to a Directorate and say, "We think you
should be spending more because the countryside research doesn't
look very big." We say the countryside people commission
research, you have mentioned this figure of 1.6, there is also
the research done by the Countryside Commission and English Nature;
they commission the research because they see a case for it, not
because we are trying to spend up or down, in relation to some
overall budget for the Department.
132. Okay then, we have got £1.3 million
being spent on countryside and wildlife research, in Chapter 6,
the very first objective that is described there is to enhance
opportunities; what do we mean by that and what research is exactly
being done for it? It is page 44, Chapter 6, 6.1: "The Department's
main objective...is to enhance opportunity in rural areas".
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) That would relate to rural
regeneration responsibilities. We would need research, for example,
which was undertaken by the Rural Development Commission on, we
need to know how many villages are without a shop, a petrol station
and a bank, a school, and so on, and the way of finding that out
is to fund the research, and that is part of the Rural Development
Commission's national advisory work, which you will see on page
47.
133. I would like to explore that, but obviously
it will take too much time.
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) The key thing is, in taking
all this research, we have now what are called the "May Principles",
Sir Robert May, of the way in which you conduct research, the
extent to which it is open, the extent to which we share information,
the extent to which we allow the peer group review of it, a commitment
to publish the results; that is really, the role of the Chief
Scientist is to make sure that all these areas of research are
conducted to those standards, rather than to determine a set of
priorities, which he and I are not the best judges of.
134. Could I beg for greater emphasis in
the Report, in future, I do not think that really has been ...
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) You think it would be useful
to draw together a table which shows research as a—I have
a table here which shows this breakdown of this £130 million,
which I am happy to give you.
Mr Olner
135. If you could leave that with us, I
think that might be helpful, Sir Andrew?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Yes.
Mr Gray
136. Just to pick up on the factual points
on the RDC, when the regeneration bits are going to the RDAs,
we know that the national bits are going to the Countryside Commission,
what is happening to the rural, voluntary and community bit of
the RDC?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) That is part of its national
function; when you say it is going to the Countryside Commission,
it is going to a new, merged body, and that is part of the national
work which will go into the new body.
137. We have talked about this very briefly
already, with regard to research, the countryside and regeneration,
but, in general, do you have any indicative figure for the 1999-2000
year on money spent on rural regeneration, and what is going to
happen after the RDAs are set up, is what I am getting at?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) No, I do not think I can
give you a figure on that, it partly depends on the results of
the CSR, it partly depends on the decisions which individual RDAs
take. There are various mechanisms to ensure that, having been
given the responsibility of regeneration in rural areas, they
do not then take that money and spend it all on the urban areas,
they will have to account for that money.
Mr Olner
138. So it is going to be ring-fenced?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) It is going to be ring-fenced,
but possibly it could be enhanced but it could not be diverted.
Mr Gray
139. The concern is that urban regeneration
is very obvious, but rural regeneration is not at all obvious,
and, as you say, the money might well get diverted?
(Sir Andrew Turnbull) Yes, but that is, in the
White Paper on RDAs it gave various assurances about how this
money would be handled, there will be a duty on the Board to give
an account of the RDA's rural work explicitly in order to ensure
that it does not simply get lost and diverted.
|
