House of Commons - Environmental Audit

Select Committee on Environmental Audit Second Report

APPENDIX

REPORT OF THE EAC DELEGATION TO THE WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

The Delegation

1. Our delegation attended the first week of the Summit which took place between 26-30 August 2002.

OBJECTIVES

2. Our objectives were to :

observe how Government delegations and other stakeholders participated in the Summit;

to participate in the parallel Inter-Parliamentary Union Conference of parliamentarians;

to network with other delegates and stakeholders including members of other Government delegations, parliamentarians, local government, business and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in order to learn about sustainable development best practice around the world;

to use information gathered to inform the future work programme of the EAC in the context of the processes and outcomes of the WSSD.

ACCREDITATION

3. We sought to attend the Summit independently and not as part of the official UK delegation as we felt this status reflected the Committee's scrutiny role. Accreditation was not as straightforward as we had anticipated as 'parliamentarians' do not have an obvious UN pigeon hole. The UN considers us to be part of the "government sphere" and therefore expected us to seek a place on the official Government delegation¹[3]. However, we were keen to attend in our own right and therefore sought accreditation as a "Major Group". The UN refused our application on the grounds that the "Major Groups" concept applied only

to non-governmental actors as specified in Agenda 21—the action plan arising from the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Agenda 21 refers to"non-governmental groups" in general and particular groups specifically such as: women, youth, farmers, trade unions and business and industry.

4. We were therefore required to seek accreditation to the Summit through a recognised UN stakeholder. We were grateful to receive this from GLOBE UK through GLOBE International (Global Legislator's Organisation for a Balanced Environment). GLOBE is a worldwide organisation of legislators dedicated to working for a clean and safe environment, for "ourselves and for the next generation". ²[4]

TABLE 1: EAC Delegation to WSSD: Itinerary

AUG
SUNDAY 25

(Not part of official visit)
MONDAY

26
TUESDAY

27
WEDNESDAY

28
THURSDAY

29
FRIDAY

30

9am -1pm

9.25am
ST and ED arrived from UK. JW and SD already in country.

Registration - ST and ED

9.30-12.30
Just Solutions Conference
(organised by The Greens/European Free Alliance) at NASREC (the Summit venue for the Civil Society activities)

Attended sessions on Cultural Diversity and SustainableCommunities, and Corporate Social Accountability (FoE International and BASD fielded speakers for the latter) .

9-10.30am
Meeting with MEC Mary Metcalfe Minister of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment, and Land Affairs for Gauteng Province. (The province which includes Johannesburg).

11am
Visit to Alexandra Township for debate on water privatisation. (Greens/European Free Alliance event)

10-1pm
Ubuntu Village for Trade Exhibition and Itinerary planning.

9-12am
Inter Parliamentary Union meeting.

JW and ST called to speak on behalf of EAC in session on the role of parliaments in ensuring implementation and compliance with reporting requirements.

11am
IPU session on
Internal Frameworks
for sustainable
development

12am.
UK delegation
NGO briefing (led
by RL and attended
By Michael
Meacher).

1pm- 7pm
Lunch with Paul Coleman - Earth Walker

[Paul walked from the UK to the Johannesburg Summit as he did to the Rio Earth Summit raising environmental awareness and planting trees at key destinations along the way]

.

2-3.30pm
Orientation Meetings with Sally Douglas (WWF) and Anna Malos (BOND)

4pm
UK Parliament Briefing by The Rt Hon. Margaret Beckett, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

5pm
NGO briefing by Margaret Beckett and latterly the Rt Hon. Michael Meacher, Minister for Environment and Agri-Environment.

ED and ST to Ubuntu Village Exhibition. (Trade, country and cultural exhibition centre for the Summit)

JW and SD to ICLEI "Local Government Moves the World" conference - including sessions on sustainable urbanisation and Agenda 21

5pm
NGO briefing
[led by Robert Lowson (RL -Director Environment Protection Strategy, DEFRA), with Michael Meacher attending]

2-2.45pm
Working lunch with Charles Secrett (Director, FoE and Craig Bennett (FoE International)

3.30-4.30
Meeting with MEPs on EU delegation

5pm
SD attended NGO briefing.

4-7pm
ED, ST and JW to opening of Water Dome by Nelson Mandela.

4-6pm
GLOBE - Seminar
Forum: Parliamentarian Involvement in Obtaining High Environmental Standards for Export Credit Agencies.

3 - 5.30pm
IPU meeting -
[Final declaration agreed]

EVE
7pm
Orientation dinner with Parliamentary FCO contacts & Tony Colman MP.

Meeting with John Gordon (UNED-UK)

Attended launch of Cell C -sponsored urban renewal art project in down town Johannesburg.

Joan Ruddock MP - debriefing on NGO briefing.
6-8pm
High Commission reception in aid of the Chevening Scholars.*

*Guests included Prof. Kader Asmal MP (South African Minister for Education), Helen Suzman, Michael Meacher and Clive Gobby (Director of SA British Council)

OUR ITINERARY

5. Our itinerary at the Summit is set out in Table 1. Unlike our usual international visits, we were unable to compile a comprehensive itinerary before our departure. This was largely due to the vast scale of the Summit and the fact that some venues and timings were only finalised at the last minute as a result of the necessary security checks. The formal Summit proceedings were held at the Sandton Conference Centre but there was also a myriad of associated UN side events and (non-UN) parallel side events taking place over five core venues in and around Johannesburg.

6. We therefore sought to plan only a back-bone schedule consisting of pre-registered events of core interest to the Committee's work and key liaison meetings. For example, with Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and Mary Metcalf, Guateng Province's MEC³[5] for Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Land Affairs. This gave us the flexibility to prioritise our itinerary on a daily basis in-country so that we could respond to the fast moving situations which inevitably accompany a UN summit. This approach worked very well in practice.

7. We stayed with a family in Observatory—a residential suburb ten miles east of Johannesburg—as we were unable to secure hotel accommodation. All establishments required a blanket ten day booking and our official visit was only five days. This arrangement was to our advantage as we were able to draw upon our hosts' extensive local and country knowledge which very much added to our overall Summit experience.

8. Transport was a key factor in gaining access to the full range of Summit activities. A shuttle bus service had been laid on but although providing a regular service, it just could not deliver the flexibility that many delegates required to actively participate in, and experience the Summit fringe. We quickly realised that the shuttle bus system could not facilitate the kind of itinerary that we wanted to pursue. We therefore employed the services of a High Commission-recommended driver for the week who was invaluable to us.

The role of parliamentarians

9. We had anticipated that our role at the Summit, outside our own parliamentary fora (discussed below), would be as passive observers. However, we were struck by the warm welcome we received from NGOs and other stakeholders at the Summit who were very appreciative that the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) was represented and that there was such a strong UK MP presence in general. (The latter was also commented on and welcomed by the Rt Hon. Michael Meacher, Minister for Environment and Agri-Environment). We found ourselves being able to act as informal intermediaries between other stakeholders, officials and Ministers.

10. As well as our observer role on behalf of the EAC, we actively sought to interact with other parliamentarians at the Summit. The key vehicles for this were:

(a) A parliamentary conference organised by the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the South African Parliament - Sustainable Development: The Role of Parliaments in Ensuring Implementation and Accountability which took place between 29-30 August.

(b) An informal meeting with MEPs attending as part of the European Union delegation.

(d) A GLOBE forum on Export Credit Agencies

INFORMAL MEETING WITH MEPS

11. We met with members of the European Parliament (EP) delegation to the Summit which included members of the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. We took this opportunity to discuss:

(a) How far parliamentarians had sought to influence summit preparations as well as the event itself.

(b) Our concerns that many established principles of the Rio agreement, such as the precautionary principle, seemed to be in danger of renegotiation at the Summit.

(c) Our role in monitoring the implementation of the summit commitments and whether the existing machinery and structure of our respective parliamentary institutions were adequate to deal with sustainable development as an overarching framework.

(d) Our participation in international parliamentary fora such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union and GLOBE to maintain the momentum on sustainable development issues after the Summit.

(e) The role of the press in shaping public attitudes to sustainable development issues. (This was prompted by Members' observations that press coverage of the Summit back in home nations was generally negative. There was also a general observation that it seemed to be more difficult to trying to keep abreast of what was going on at the Summit on site than it was for many back home who were relying on the media.)

(f) The role of multi-nationals (as Corporate Social Responsibility was being pushed hard and very visibly by many NGOs at the Summit.)

12. We agreed that Summit follow-up was a particular area where it was important that the EAC and European Parliament's Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy Committee shared information. The EAC already seeks to visit the EP Committee in Brussels on an annual basis and keeps its Members in touch with the EAC's latest work. We agreed that the WSSD follow-up work should be a key feature of future liaison meetings.

IPU CONFERENCE (29-30 AUGUST)

13. We attended the parliamentary meeting organised by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) and the South African Parliament on 29-30 August. This meeting was open to all members of parliament attending the World Summit and provided an opportunity for parliamentarians to gain an insight into the main issues at stake at the Summit and to bring their influence to bear on the intergovernmental negotiations towards the adoption of an Implementation Plan.

14. We were particularly keen to participate in the IPU session on the "Role of Parliaments in ensuring implementation and compliance with reporting requirements" and were very pleased that both Joan Walley MP and Simon Thomas MP were called to speak in this session. During their three minutes of air time, both Members:

clarified that they were attending the Summit on behalf of the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee and not as part of the official UK delegation;

emphasised the important role of parliamentarians in scrutinising their own Government's progress in implementing the commitments agreed at the Summit and called for the IPU's final declaration to highlight this role;

explained the role of the EAC and its proposed Summit follow-up work.

15. We supported our suggestion for changes to the final declaration by submitting a formal amendment to the final declaration which was supported by other UK Members of Parliament who were either attending the conference as part of the UK delegation or as representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe or the IPU itself. This amendment was accepted without vote. A copy of the final declaration is attached as an annex to this report. Further details of the conference schedule are available on the IPU's website.⁴[6]

16. Both interventions were greeted with much support and interest from other parliamentarians, many of whom sought further information about the EAC. We had taken the opportunity of the conference to display a short note about the Committee and its work along with the other promotional material of other parliaments and this proved to be popular with other delegates. Their interest in our work and acknowledgement of its importance reinforced our view that an audit committee like the EAC is a key component of the national machinery required to progress sustainable development aims. One member of the delegation received a subsequent invitation to the Gauteng regional parliament to attend a conference to set targets for poverty reduction and the means of auditing progress. It is important that the EAC's own work continues to promote this sustainable development audit role.

GREENS AND EUROPEAN FREE ALLIANCE EVENTS

17. We attended the final two sessions of the Greens/EFA sponsored conference on sustainable development Just Solutions! A better world is possible which was co-hosted by the Heinrich Boell Foundation (Monday 26 August).⁵[7] These sessions were concerned with corporate accountability and the way ahead after the Summit (a closing assessment of the conference).

18. We also joined a Greens/EFA organised visit to Alexander Township which had been arranged in co-operation with Alexander Township Renewal Committee to highlight the Gauteng debate about water privatisation. In Alexander, we were able to see for ourselves the difficulties of living without sufficient access to water and sanitation services and hear a range of stakeholders express their views on privatisation and what this might mean for the township and other settlements like it.

GLOBE FORUM ON EXPORT CREDIT AGENCIES (ECAS)

19. We attended the GLOBE seminar forum "Parliamentarians Involvement in Obtaining High Environmental Standards for Export Credit Agencies" (August 29). GLOBE launched a related initiative, "RENEW" (Renewable Energy Now! through Export-finance World-wide) at the Summit. RENEW is a voluntary initiative that aims to see five of the G-8 countries, including the UK, commit ten percent of their energy export finance lending portfolios to the renewable energy sector by 2010. It was therefore timely that the Prime Minister took the opportunity of the Summit to announce that £50 million per year would be made available through the Export Credits Guarantee Department (EGCD) for supporting renewable energy exports.

20. The EAC's own cross-departmental remit means that the work of the UK's EGCD is of interest to us. We appreciated the opportunity to hear presentations at the GLOBE Forum from: The Hon.Shuichi Kato (a member of the Japanese Diet), James Mahoney (Vice President of the Engineering and Environment Division of the US Export Import Bank), and US Congressmen Christopher Shays and James Greenwood. Both the Japanese and US Export Credit Agency's (ECAs) are seen as leaders in developing environmental guidelines for ECAs. The Japanese Bank for International Cooperation recently adopted the most progressive environmental guidelines among all the ECAs of the OECD. We heard from all the speakers how the UK EGCD was recognised as following hot on the heels of the world leaders in this area. An examination of the latest progress in EGCD would be an important addition to the EAC's work programme in the near future.

The role of local and devolved government

21. Effective local and community action will be required to fulfill many of the commitments made at the Summit and we were grateful to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) for granting us "drop-in" status to their Summit parallel event "Local Government Moves the World." This conference enabled local government leaders from around the world to present their expectations for the Summit and to interact with national and observer delegations.⁶[8]

22. We were also pleased to have a private meeting with Mary Metcalf, the MEC⁷[9] for Agriculture, Conservation, Environment and Land Affairs for Gauteng Provincial Government. Gauteng is the largest of South Africa's nine provinces by population⁸[10] and governed by a provincial administration which has legislative independence in a number of areas including the environment, housing, public transport and regional planning and development.

23. We discussed our respective parliamentary and local government systems. Mrs Metcalfe alerted us to a Summit workshop which Gauteng Province was hosting concerning regional level sustainable development. In its report on the UK's preparations for WSSD, the EAC concluded that it would welcome high level participation at the Summit from all the devolved administrations.⁹[11] We were therefore pleased to hear that both the Greater London Authority and Welsh Assembly participated in this event which resulted in a political declaration.¹⁰[12] Unfortunately, we had to leave Johannesburg before the workshop and before the arrival of the UK's First Ministers from the devolved administrations. However, it is important that the Committee continues to track the progress of the devolved administrations in its WSSD follow-up inquiry.

24. Mrs Metcalf told us how environmental issues had been a low priority previously in Gauteng because of the immediate post-apartheid issues of housing and employment. However, the MEC was now seeking to mainstream the issue in the context of sustainable development with other key policy concerns and draw her colleagues into the environmental arena. One of the key environmental problems which the province has to deal with is its numerous mine dumps. The pollution and public health threat which they pose is exacerbated by the pressures on land-use for housing which means that settlements may be built in close proximity. The MEC had established an informal forum to work on a rehabilitation plan for the dump areas which included non-governmental organisations and Government departments. However, we heard that this form of collaborative working was still a relatively new concept in the province.

25. We are keen to maintain our newly established links with Gauteng Province. The exchange of examples of sustainable development practice internationally is invaluable to establishing best practice in this area.

Stakeholder engagement

26. The EAC's pre-WSSD report welcomed the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in the UK Government and the UN preparatory process for the Summit.¹¹[13] We were therefore keen to see how stakeholders were interacting with the UK delegation at the Summit itself.

27. As parliamentary stakeholders, not on the UK delegation, we were very pleased with the level of briefing which we were offered by the UK delegation. The Rt Hon. Margaret Beckett, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, held a briefing specifically for parliamentarians on our first day at the Summit (Monday 26 August). We also attended the daily UK delegation briefings for NGOs. It was not obvious that there would be such a daily briefing at the outset. However, officials responded to popular demand (endorsed by Margaret Beckett and Michael Meacher) and established a regular slot. This was by no means a standard practice for all delegations and envied by delegates from other nations. Mr Meacher sought to attend as many of these briefings as he was able and this was very much appreciated by all stakeholders.

28. These briefings provided a valuable opportunity for UK stakeholders like ourselves, outside the official UK delegation, to exchange information and intelligence with officials and Ministers and to express views on the shape of the Summit negotiations. Unfortunately, the venue for the Civil Society Forum, NASREC, was a 45 minutes journey from Sandton. This made the exchange of information and delegates between that Forum and the main proceedings logistically difficult and NGOs made it clear to us at a very early stage that this was hindering their practical participation at WSSD. This was especially true for smaller groups such as the youth group, the Woodcraft Folk, who felt that their lobbying power had been reduced because they did not have sufficient resources to split between two such distant sites. This situation was exacerbated by the fact that those running the conference centre had initially limited the number of entrants to the main conference complex for fire safety purposes and this was hindering access. We raised the matter with Mrs Beckett in our parliamentary briefing and she undertook to investigate the matter and see how the UK could help. She also made this undertaking to the NGOs which raised this matter at the following NGO briefing.

29. Access to the main conference centre was subsequently improved. Much of the initial problem had been a reaction to the initial rush of delegates for the opening sessions which had subsequently levelled off as the proceedings got underway. However, further representations were made by NGO representatives, throughout our week at the UK briefings, frustrated by the patchy interaction between the UK and EU delegations and the events at the Civil Society Forum, as well as the difficulties in getting hold of the papers made available at the main conference centre.

30. Margaret Beckett reported that the UK delegation was very much alive to the problem and she had raised the matter with the EU Presidency who recognised that it was a serious issue. There was clearly a limit to what they could do within the logistics established by the conference organisers but these representations certainly impressed upon Ministers the need to try and incorporate visits to NASREC as far as possible in their schedules and to ensure that there were opportunities for briefings at that venue. Mrs Beckett informed us that there were UN rules precluding the exchange of certain texts but that daily briefings were taking place at NASREC updating Forum participants on the proceedings at Sandton.

31. It is unclear how far these logistical difficulties disabled the degree of NGO input and interaction. It would therefore be useful for the EAC to seek specific feedback on this issue in its follow-up inquiry.

Overall view of the UK Government and delegation in action

32. We were impressed with the organisation and co-ordination of the UK delegation and were left with the impression that this was a view also shared by a range of NGOs and members of other country delegations. We were pleased to see UK Ministers secure speaking slots in two of the five main plenaries in the first week.¹²[14]

PRESENTATION ISSUES

Press coverage

33. The EAC's pre-Summit inquiry examined the UK Government's communications strategy for the Summit. The Committee welcomed the fact that such a strategy had been prepared but commented that the late appearance of the strategy had meant that there was little impetus for departments to "drip-feed" messages about the Summit at an early stage. At the time of writing in March 2002, the Committee concluded that there was little evidence of a sound foundation of public awareness upon which to launch a more powerful media offensive nearer the Summit itself. We stressed the importance of the Government making use of the time that it had left to generate some enthusiasm for the event.¹³[15] The Committee will examine the impact of the Communications Strategy in the UK in its WSSD follow-up report. We comment here on our experience of the media response from our perspective on-site in Johannesburg. We feel that the communication of sustainable development both in relation to the Summit, and in general, is an important area for the Committee's attention.

34. UK Government communications with the press at the Summit appeared to be very effective. The UK delegation held daily press briefings and officials told us that Ministers were doing their best to be available for interviews. We were pleased to see UK Ministers featured regularly in the "Summit Star"—the daily, Summit newspaper.

35. However, we were struck by the negative press coverage of the Summit in the UK which largely focussed on tales of opulence and over indulgence in contrast with the appalling living conditions just a few miles away in Alexander township. We were constantly asked about this "high living" in various interviews which we conducted for national news and our local, constituency media. It was disappointing that much of the UK press hardly departed from this easy story to take a more strategic look at the global issues that the Summit was grappling with.

36. The Summit was an opportunity for South Africa to showcase its wares to the world and the nation was clearly keen to demonstrate that it had the capacity to stage a world class event. The Sandton Conference Centre was indeed a conference complex housed within easy reach of high quality shops, restaurants and hotels. In order to be close enough to the Summit action many delegates made their base in this area. However, we saw no indication that delegates were over-indulging in opulent living. To the contrary, we saw delegates struggling to fit a lunch stop into busy schedules—a problem which we shared —and observed a UK "mission control" delegation office which never seemed to sleep.

37. The UK delegation office was housed in the Michaelangelo Hotel in the Sandton complex and UK Ministers were also based there. This was a five-star hotel and offered the facilities associated with such a grading, adding to press stories of indulgence. However, we suspect that its location rather than its menu was the prime factor in its choice. It was ten minutes walk from the conference centre and therefore very much in the hub of ministerial Summit activity as well as being easily accessible for those visiting the conference centre and wishing to make contact with the delegation.

Showcasing the UK

38. We were surprised to find that the UK, unlike most nations, did not have a country stand at the Ubuntu Village, the cultural hub of the Summit venues. Margaret Beckett defended this by saying that the UK had chosen to take a sectoral approach and that information about UK initiatives had been integrated into themed stands. We did observe that many Department for International Development (DfID) documents were displayed on development-orientated stands for the UN or other initiatives. However, we feel that the Summit was a sufficiently high profile, international event that it warranted both a national and a sectoral approach.

39. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Department of Trade and Industry are highly experienced in promoting UK trade interests abroad and we feel that this expertise should have been tapped and translated into an effective promotion of the UK and its approach to sustainable development at the Ubuntu Village.

In Conclusion

40. We left on the evening of Friday 31 August and it was therefore still unclear exactly what the outcome of the Summit would be on 4 September. We felt privileged to have been able to attend this once in a decade event where issues of such international importance were being discussed. We valued the unique vantage point which we had of the proceedings, unfolding on a daily basis, and believe that this will enhance the Committee's future work.

41. We have returned from the Summit invigorated by our own experiences. This, in spite of the rather uninspiring, but solid, final outcomes in terms of the official commitments made there. We are convinced of the pivotal role which parliamentarians, and in particular members of the EAC, can play in monitoring and reviewing the UK Government's progress in implementing and building upon its Summit commitments.

^1³ Correspondence from Zehra Aydin Sipos, Major Groups Programme Coordinator for the UN WSSD Secretariat, 27 April 2002. Back

^2⁴ www.globeinternational.org. Back

^3⁵ Member of the Executive Council. Back

^4⁶ www.ipu.org/english/. Back

^5⁷ Headquartered in Berlin, Germany, the Heinrich Boell Foundation is a political non-profit Foundation affiliated with the party of Alliance 90/The Greens. It seeks to promote democratic ideas, civil society and international understanding centering its work on the core political values of ecology, democracy, solidarity and non-violence.

Back