Appendix
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT COMMITTEE
REPORT: "GREENING GOVERNMENT 2003" (Thirteenth Report
of Session 2002-03)
INTRODUCTION
1. The Government welcomes the Thirteenth Report
of the Environmental Audit Committee, the latest in its series
of reports on the Greening Government initiative. The report provides
a detailed analysis of the 2002 Sustainable Development in Government
(SDiG) Report and we have given careful consideration to the Committee's
many conclusions and recommendations.
2. It was not, of course, possible to take account
of the Committee's findings in preparing the 2003 SDiG Report
which was also published in November 2003. The Committee's findings
will be taken into account wherever possible in the 2004 SDiG
Report. However, the scope to do so may be limited since many
of the systems, especially for data collection, are already in
place for the current year. Government is strongly committed to
integrating sustainable development into its policies and practices
and will work with the Committee and other expert bodies to improve
its performance and reporting. We also hope that closer working
with the Committee will enable the reporting cycles of the Committee
and the Government to move closer together.
3. The Government response is set out below. The
Committee's recommendations are highlighted in bold and cross-referenced
to the body of its report.
THE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
Recommendation 1. The First Annual Report is based
on a questionnaire sent out to departments. In response to an
earlier recommendation we made, DEFRA have made available both
the questionnaire and the complete departmental responses. We
welcome the provision of this detailed information. It marks a
significant step forward in terms of transparency and accountability,
and has enabled us to carry out a significantly more extensive
analysis than we could otherwise have done. (Paragraph 12).
4. The Government appreciates the Committee's comments
and will continue to make such information available to the Committee
and more widely.
5. The Government decided this year that it would
be clearer to separate the reporting of policy issues from reporting
on the management of the Government Estate. Accordingly, the
2003 Sustainable Development in Government (SDiG) Report provides
an online report and searchable database of information relating
to the management of the Government's land, buildings and staff.
It covers data from the 20 central Government Departments and
their executive agencies for the year April 2002-March 2003 and
broadly follows the format of the Framework for Sustainable
Development on the Government Estate. There is considerable
merit in a self-contained report on operational estates management
and the Government intends to retain this structure in future.
The 2004 SDiG Report will report on all Framework commitments
and targets. Defra officials will work closely with the Committee
officials to ensure that a robust monitoring system is established
and maintained.
6. Reporting on policy issues will for the current
year appear in the next annual report on the UK sustainable development
strategy (Achieving a better quality of life) to be published
in spring 2004. Thereafter, the Government will determine how
best to report on policy making. It will take into account the
views of the Committee, the Sustainable Development Commission
and others.
Recommendation 2. We recommend that all departments
should provide a printed copy of their responses to both the SDU
and EAC. These should be signed by the senior officer who is responsible
for sustainable development issues in order to ensure accountability
at a sufficiently high level within each department. (Paragraph
14).
7. Departments in general are moving away from printed
copy towards making information available online: online systems
are more efficient and reduce paper wastage. We do not consider
that requiring a signed printed copy would be the most effective
way to ensure accountability for sustainable development within
Departments. Nevertheless, we will review the appropriateness
of adopting this recommendation alongside future decisions on
the nature and content of these reports.
Staff resources
Recommendation 3. The level of staff resources
which most departments specifically devote to the sustainable
development agenda is very small, reflecting the low priority
accorded to it. The grade of staff working on these issues is
also relatively low. We would particularly single out DCMS, DfES,
DH, IR and ONS as departments within which we would have expected
far greater commitment in terms of staff resources in view of
the specific challenges which sustainable development poses for
those departments. (Paragraph 19).
Recommendation 4. Seven departments have not set
up an SDU or division, and these include DCMS, DfES, HMT, HO and
IR. This is surprising and disappointing in view of the potentially
important roles these departments should have in relation to sustainable
development. (Paragraph 20).
8. Improved integration and mainstreaming of sustainable
development is one of the objectives of departmental Green Ministers:
all Departments have officials with responsibility for sustainable
development and responsibility for sustainable development is
often an integral part of a number of both policy and operational
posts. Further, departmental officials come together from time
to time on cross-departmental committees to consider and take
forward both policy and operational issues.
9. The questionnaire responses here and the Committee's
comments reflect the difficulties in quantifying meaningfully
staff resources dedicated to sustainable development. Neither
the number of staff engaged on sustainable development nor the
existence of a dedicated sustainable development unit is a particularly
good indicator of the importance that a Department attaches to
sustainable development or the extent to which sustainable development
is integrated into its policies and operations. As the Committee
is aware, neither DfID nor FCO has a sustainable development unit,
but both have environmental divisions and take sustainable development
and environmental concerns very seriously in their overseas work.
FCO's environment division, for example, is currently leading
on the development of a departmental sustainable development strategy
and sustainable development is one of the Department's top strategic
priorities.
10. Further, several of the Departments singled out
by the Committee (where it would have expected a far greater commitment
in terms of staff resources) have made considerable progress over
the past year. DfES, for example, published a Sustainable Development
Action Plan in September 2003. In resource terms, it has a small
team which has among its other duties responsibility for coordinating
sustainable development policy and liaison with other Departments.
There is a network of officials with responsibility for sustainable
development in the various sectors of education and skills; and
the Department has recently agreed to have a dedicated resource
to help take forward its Action Plan, working with the Sustainable
Development Commission and other agencies.
11. DCMS, another of the Departments specifically
mentioned as having limited resources, has also recently published
a sustainable development strategy. The Department's policy-related
work in sustainable development is driven by and coordinated through
a central cross-cutting division (Strategy, Policy and Delivery);
responsibility for identifying priorities and delivering progress
in individual sectors lies with relevant Heads of Division; estate
operations are handled by the Procurement and Property Services
branch which works through estate management contractors and a
network of environmental champions.
12. Whilst ONS does not have dedicated sustainable
development resources, it has made significant progress in greening
its estate, and has Environmental Management Systems certified
to the international EMS standard ISO14001 across 95 per cent
of its estate.
13. Of the other Departments identified as lacking
a sustainable development unit:
- As a small Department, HM Treasury
does not have a dedicated sustainable development unit. Responsibility
is incorporated directly into a range of policy posts. In particular,
work on economic instruments to address environmental threats,
international poverty reduction and public spending contributes
directly to the Government's sustainable development goals. When
necessary, additional short-term resources on sustainable development
are made available, for example, for the Spending Review 2004.
In addition, HM Treasury has a dedicated sustainable development
manager with its Facilities Management Team.
- The Department of Health will be reviewing how
it discharges its responsibilities for sustainable development,
harnessing resources across the Department and its agencies.
NHS PASA, for example, appointed a full time Head of Sustainable
Development Policy in 2003 and the NHS Estates Agency has a Sustainable
Development Policy Manager.
- The Home Office considers that its sustainable
development team represents an appropriate level of resources
and that it provides a central point of expertise for the rest
of the Department.
- The Inland Revenue has recently doubled its staff
resources dedicated to sustainable development but recognises
that further resources are required to cover all its operational
areas. Additionally, all members of Revenue Policy are required
to complete environmental impact appraisals when putting together
ideas for new legislation.
- Notwithstanding these positive initiatives, the
Government recognises that collectively and individually Departments
will need to keep under constant review the level of resources
available to promote its sustainable development agenda. This
is a particular responsibility of departmental Green Ministers.
The 2003 SDiG Report has already made clear that the implementation
of targets in the Framework for Sustainable Development in
the Government Estate relies on operational teams in individual
Departments and upon adequate resources being available. Resource
availability is one of the issues to be covered in the review
of the Framework planned for 2004-05. As part of that review,
the Government will also consider the scope to strengthen official
networks to exchange and share best practice in sustainable development.
Recommendation 5. In the case of both DH and DWP,
the senior officer responsible for sustainable development is
not located in the departments' central offices alongside the
dedicated sustainable development staff. Such an arrangement hardly
seems to us conducive to effective operational management on a
day to day basis, nor indeed to the need to exert leverage on
central policy divisions within the department. (Paragraph 22).
14. The Government does not consider that physical
co-location of staff is a necessary requirement for effective
operation in this age of electronic communication. It also considers
that it is for individual Departments to determine which senior
official is best placed to take on responsibility for sustainable
development in the light of departmental structures and responsibilities.
In DWP, the nominated senior official is the Finance Director
who is well-placed to exert leverage across the entire Department,
and the sustainable development team sits within his Directorate.
DH, in identifying a lead role for sustainable development with
one of the Regional Directors of Public Health, ensures close
working both with Government Offices and with headquarters policy
leads.
Recommendation 6. It is unclear what level of
commitment and representation exists at a Management Board level
as there is no information provided on this topic. Our analysis
of staff resources does not inspire confidence that senior management
is committed to implementing sustainable development. ENV(G) should
probe this area in greater depth by including more searching questions
in the 2004 questionnaire. (Paragraph 25).
15. All Departments have a senior official with responsibility
for sustainable development; all these officials either sit on
the departmental management board or report directly to an officer
who does. For the future, as indicated above in response to
Recommendation 1, Defra's officials will liaise with Committee
officials in preparing for the next SDiG Report.
Greening policy: objectives and targets
Recommendation 7. While we recognise that target
setting is not something to be pursued for its own sake, the almost
universal failure by departments to set new environmental objectives
and targets cannot but reflect insufficient commitment, resources,
and priorities in this area. (Paragraph 27).
16. Departments are increasingly taking steps to
formalise their commitment to sustainable development within the
context of their main areas of responsibility. This is demonstrated
by the growing number of departmental sustainable development
strategies or equivalent high level documents. For example, DfES
published an action plan in September 2003; DCMS published a strategy
in February 2004; DWP has a published corporate sustainable development
policy statement and also a suite of targets within a currently
internal strategy; in February 2003, ODPM published its Sustainable
Communities Plan, through which all ODPM policy areas are contributing
to creating sustainable communities; DfID and FCO both have PSAs
relating to international sustainable development and FCO published
in 2003, A Strategy for the FCO UK International Priorities, that
includes sustainable development as one of eight strategic priorities.
Other Departments now developing strategies or similar documents
include: MoD, which has made several policy commitments to sustainable
development, supported by an internally published strategy for
sustainable development and an environment manual; DfT, which
is developing a policy statement laying out high-level objectives
and principles for incorporating sustainable development into
its activities; DTI, whose business plan for 2003 includes an
objective to promote sustainable development, will be reviewing
its Action Plan of 2000 in 2004; C&E has published a Corporate
Sustainable Development Policy Statement and is currently developing
an Action Plan; and Defra, which is currently reviewing its 2002
sustainable development strategy (Foundations for our Future).
Recommendation 8. We are astonished at the terse
and unhelpful response provided by the Inland Revenue when asked
about the compilation of its Sustainable Development Report. Given
the lack of dedicated staff resources within the department, it
only serves to reinforce the impression that it is little interested
in the sustainable development agenda. (Paragraph 29).
17. The Inland Revenue recognises the importance
of its contribution to sustainable development and recognises
too that, like other Departments, it needs to do more to ensure
that sustainable development is fully integrated into its core
business. The Department regrets its seemingly unhelpful response
when asked about its Sustainable Development Report in Spending
Review 2002. This was answered in part in other sections of its
response, but Inland Revenue legislative measures are generally
introduced via the Budget/Finance Bill and relevant environmental
assessments are published on Budget Day.
Recommendation 9. We find it deplorable that both
DCMS and ONS should place so little weight on sustainable development
and environmental objectives, as both departments in their respective
spheres face significant challenges in this area. This contrasts
with the far more positive approach adopted by some other departments,
such as DTLR and DfES. (Paragraph 32).
18. Since the 2002 SDiG Report was published, DCMS
has published its strategy, referred to above in the response
to Recommendation 7. The strategy contains a policy statement
and an action plan which includes all the Department's sectors
and Non-Departmental Public Bodies; education and awareness raising
for sustainable development are given prominence.
19. ONS does not directly develop policy for Government
but instead provides evidence for decision-making by others.
ONS data feed into a wide range of indicators and other monitoring
used by Government, in particular the UK Indicators of Sustainable
Development maintained by Defra statisticians. ONS has also done
a lot of work in developing environmental accounts. Additionally,
as indicated above in response to Recommendation 3, ONS has made
significant progress in greening its estate, and has Environmental
Management Systems certified to the international EMS standard
ISO14001 across 95 per cent of its estate.
Recommendation 10. Environmental sustainability
should constitute an over-arching framework within which policy
making is carried out. But departments have made little attempt
to incorporate environmental objectives within their high level
priorities, and this is reflected in the dearth of environmental
targets in the most recent Public Service Agreements. This betrays
a lack of commitment to this agenda which complements the lack
of resources devoted to it. (Paragraph 34).
20. The Government is firmly committed to bringing
the environment, social progress and the economy alongside each
other at the heart of policy making. The Spending Review (SR)
2002 took full account of the principles set out in the UK sustainable
development strategy. It led not only to an overarching PSA owned
by Defra, "to promote sustainable development across Government
and the country as a whole as measured by achieving positive trends
in the Government's headline indicators of sustainable development",
but also to a number of other PSA targets that directly relate
to the headline indicators, including in relation to the environment.
Both DfID and FCO have PSAs specifically referring to international
sustainable development. In SR2004, sustainable development will
be one of a number of cross-cutting thematic priorities.
21. Defra's aim is to secure sustainable development
working with and through other Departments. To achieve its PSA
target, Defra is engaging directly with those responsible for
related PSAs and other targets across Government. This work seeks
to bring sustainable development to the forefront in policy making,
particularly in those areas affecting headline indicators. The
effective use of indicators to promote progress will be considered
in the review of the UK sustainable development strategy and its
indicators.
GREENING POLICY: POLICY APPRAISAL
Recommendation 11. If departments are indeed carrying
out integrated appraisals, it follows that they must be screening
new policies for environmental impacts as part of that process.
For the Government's commitment to sustainable development to
be taken seriously, ENV(G) must restate and rigorously implement
the requirement that departments should maintain and make publicly
available a central list of new policies, together with the results
of screening them for environmental impacts. (Paragraph 42).
Recommendation 12. There is a variety of overlapping
requirements and guidance relating to appraisal. The Government
must rationalise these and develop Integrated Policy Appraisal
to become a comprehensive tool. In doing so it must set out how
departments should resolve the apparent conflict between monetary
and non-monetary approaches to appraising environmental impacts.
(Paragraph 45).
22. The Government is committed to consulting publicly
on new proposals and details of all public consultations are available
at http://www.ukonline.gov.uk/citizenspace/
consultationsmenu/fs/en.
In addition, the Treasury puts budget environmental appraisals
on its website; these are updated regularly to reflect ongoing
monitoring of environmental indicators and further evaluation
of specific schemes.
23. In contrast to the mandatory assessment required
of projects (EC Directive on Environmental Impact Assessment and
from July 2004 the Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment),
environmental appraisal is not a formal, rigid system but a practical
and informative approach to ensure that significant direct, indirect
and cumulative impacts on the environment are properly considered.
Where environmental appraisals are carried out as part of a mandatory
Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA), they are included in the final
RIA report. Copies of final RIAs must be placed both on the Department's
website and in the House library.
24. Environmental appraisal is a key component of
the Integrated Policy Appraisal (IPA) tool that was piloted in
2003 by seven Departments and one Government Office. The tool
requires the policy maker to consider a structured series of questions
to take account of the economic, environmental, social and distributional
impacts of the policy. Its use involves identifying the level
of further appraisal (including environmental appraisal) needed
for a particular policy.
25. The inclusion of monetary and non-monetary measures
of impact within environmental appraisal is unavoidable since
environmental impacts, unlike economic ones, do not have a market
value. Several Departments are supporting the development of
alternative valuation methods by commissioning original research
on key environmental impacts including water quality, air quality
and noise; this work in time will support greater use of monetary
estimates in environmental appraisal.
26. The pilot showed that the IPA tool has the potential
to support better policy making and joined up government but it
also highlighted issues that would need to be resolved if it were
to be used more widely. In particular, it reaffirmed the need
to clarify the way in which the IPA relates to other policy appraisal
systems including the mandatory RIA and the need to provide clearer
central support and guidance for policy makers.
27. Over the coming year, further work will be undertaken
to improve central guidance to Departments on appraisal methodologies.
The Cabinet Office has strengthened its guidance on RIAs to incorporate
sustainable development considerations more effectively and wider
take-up of RIAs will be encouraged across all areas of Government.
The future development of IPA will be considered as part of
this ongoing work. In the meantime, the IPA tool continues to
be available for wider piloting and several Departments are using
it, including Defra and MoD.
Recommendation 13. It is impossible to ascertain
whether most departments have formal awareness raising strategies
in place. But it is clear that few departments—with the
exception of the FCO—have any structured approach to monitoring
the effectiveness of their strategies. (Paragraph 46).
28. Although few Departments have free-standing awareness
raising strategies, all Departments are taking steps to make staff
aware of sustainable development. Departments use a variety of
methods: most use intranet sites, posters and leaflets to convey
key messages; some have appointed local 'champions' who lead in
their areas and establish a link between the central team and
the wider Department; a few have started to introduce regular
seminars and formal training for example in staff induction courses.
29. Much, although not all, of this awareness raising
activity is related to the introduction of Environmental Management
Systems and the greening of operations so that its effectiveness
will be monitored through outcomes, particularly departmental
progress against Framework targets. Several interdepartmental
groups of officials already share best practice in operational
matters and there are plans to develop an online sustainable development
forum with membership from across the public sector, to take this
work forward within and beyond central Government.
30. The Government recognises that education and
awareness raising are central to achieving sustainable development
and it will be looking to Green Ministers as sustainable development
champions for their Departments to make this a priority over the
coming year. Such an initiative is particularly timely given
publication by both DfES and DCMS of sustainable development strategies
in which these themes are of paramount importance.
Greening operations
Recommendation 14. Our overall findings on the
progress departments are making towards greening operations demonstrate
continuing weaknesses in data availability and huge variations
in performance. (Paragraph 50).
31. Data collection has improved over the past year
as Departments have introduced Environmental Management Systems
(EMSs) for many of their sites. Further improvement can be expected
as this process continues and Departments work towards the Framework
targets for introduction of EMSs. But data availability is likely
to remain an issue and has already been identified as something
to be addressed in the review of the Framework planned for 2004-05.
32. As the Framework targets are rolled out and revised
over time, higher and more even standards of performance can be
expected across Government. But differences in departmental performance
are inevitable given the huge variations in size and type of estates,
and in working practices. The key priority is to ensure that
all Departments are moving towards more sustainable management
of their estates and that Government meets the Framework targets
overall.
Recommendation 15. Our conclusions and recommendations
on some key aspects of operational performance are set out below.
(Paragraph 51).
(a) With the exception of those departments which
utilise the Whitehall District Heating Scheme, progress on CHP
schemes remains poor. Renewable energy, however, presents a more
varied picture with some departments well ahead of the 5% March
2003 target. (Paragraph 51.a).
33. The Government has recently published the energy
section of the Framework, which commits the Government to develop
a long-term strategy, up to 2020, for sourcing renewable energy
on the Estate. It also commits Departments to source at least
10 per cent electricity from renewable sources by 31 March 2008
(2010 for MoD) and, for the first time, sets a target for Combined
Heat and Power (CHP) to source at least 15 per cent of electricity
from Good Quality CHP by 2010. (Allowances will be made for those
Departments that already purchase 100 per cent renewable energy.)
34. Since 2001, Departments have been buying electricity
from renewable sources (defined as sources that are exempt from
the Climate Change Levy). The interim target of purchasing five
per cent of electricity from such sources by March 2003 has been
exceeded. Last year 13 Departments were purchasing energy from
renewable sources. Now all 20 Departments purchase renewable electricity,
with seven Departments (CO, DfID, DfT, DH, DWP, HMT and LOD) purchasing
more than 50 per cent of their total electricity use from such
sources. Four Departments (Defra, HMT, MoD and ODPM) source a
part of their electricity from in-house CHP plants which currently
generate about one per cent of the Government Estate's electricity
consumption. IR has a District Heating scheme for its Nottingham
offices.
(b) In terms of overall performance across the
entire estate, the Government appears to have met in both 2000-01
and 2001-02 the new target set of a 1% per annum reduction in
carbon emissions, with overall reductions of 3% and 7% respectively.
However, some individual departments have conspicuously failed
to meet the target, with carbon emissions increasing in one or
both years against the baseline. (Paragraph 51.b).
35. Every year, the Buildings Research Establishment
(BRE), in conjunction with Defra, collects data on energy use
on the Government Estate. Figures for 2002-03 are still provisional
but the latest data suggest that overall weather-corrected carbon
emissions (excluding contributions from bought-in renewables
and CHP) are down one, two and three per cent respectively for
2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 against the 1999-2000 baseline.
These figures do not include the effects of green electricity
purchases, but arise principally from energy efficiency improvements,
and occasionally changes in estate size. MoD has achieved reductions
of seven per cent. Emissions from the civil Departments have
increased by some five per cent reflecting a growing estate, although
energy efficiency has improved overall with emissions per square
metre of floor area down by over five per cent. Data for 2002-03
will be published on Defra's website once returns have been verified.
(c) We have some concerns on the Government's
plan to replace the interim 1% per annum carbon reduction target
with targets based on benchmarking individual offices. We would
urge the Government to ensure that all departments face targets
which are at least as challenging as the current one. (Paragraph
51.c).
36. The new energy section of the Framework requires
Departments to reduce absolute carbon, from fuel and electricity
used in buildings on their estate, by 12.5 per cent by 2010-11,
relative to 1999-2000, on top of the 19 per cent already achieved
in the 1990s campaign. It also includes a target requiring Departments
to increase the energy efficiency of buildings on their estate,
in terms of kWh of fuel and electricity use per square metre of
buildings floor area, (or estate area), by 15 per cent by 2010-11,
relative to 1999-2000. These targets are designed to achieve
reductions in absolute carbon as a result primarily of more efficient
use of fuel and electricity (whatever the source) and also self-generation
of zero/low carbon heat and electricity. Two targets are included
since in a few cases Departments may have difficulty in meeting
the overall absolute carbon reduction target because of changes
in estate size, building type or activity, but should be able
to demonstrate continued improvement in energy efficiency.
(d) Given the incentives which the Government
has provided to encourage LPG since 1997, it is disappointing
that only some 547 vehicles out of a total fleet of over 18,600
are LPG equipped. The performance of DWP is particularly creditable,
while that of HO, IR and C&E is far less so. (Paragraph 51.d).
37. Four per cent of all Government vehicles were
run on alternative fuel or were LPG/Petrol hybrids as of April
2003. Although the total fleet size has remained the same, nine
per cent of all vehicles on the civil estate are now alternatively
fuelled. Government is therefore well on its way to meeting the
target of having 10 per cent of all fleet cars alternatively fuelled
by 2006. C&E in particular have more than doubled the number
of LPG vehicles in their fleet. Fifteen Departments own or lease
alternatively fuelled vehicles, of which DWP accounts for two-thirds
of the total.
(e) Only 5 out of 19 departments have clearly
met the March 2002 water consumption target, while only 6 met
the main waste recovery target set in 1999 by Green Ministers.
We regard this as an abysmal performance. (Paragraph 51.e).
38. The 2003 SDiG Report shows that over the reporting
year April 2002 to March 2003, eight of the 13 Departments that
have data for both 2001-02 and 2002-03, recorded a reduction in
water consumption, and five Departments recorded increased usage.
DWP, with the highest increase (23 per cent), has since introduced
a programme of water reduction measures, including waterless urinals,
leak detection processes and reduced water flow taps.
39. Only two Departments have so far met the Framework
target for water usage set for March 2004 (7.7 m3 per
person per year) and this will need to be a priority over the
coming year. The fact that most Departments (17 out of 20) now
take part in the Watermark Project should help progress towards
this target.
40. The 2003 SDiG Report shows that over the reporting
year April 2002 to March 2003, 53 per cent of total measured waste
was recovered, with nine Departments (CO, Defra, DfID, DfT, DH,
DTI, DWP, HMT and ODPM) recovering more than 40 per cent of their
waste (the 1999 target). Fifteen Departments have waste minimisation
schemes covering their office estates of which all have schemes
covering more than half of their staff. Eighteen Departments
now have recycling schemes for their office estates of which all
have recycling schemes covering more than two-thirds of their
staff, and 15 Departments have schemes covering more than 90 per
cent of their staff.
41. The Government will shortly publish the waste
section of the Framework with new targets for waste reduction
and recovery.
(f) There are
huge variations in departmental performance. The proportion of
renewable energy purchased, for example, ranges from 0% to over
75%, while the proportion of paper purchased meeting the 80% post-consumer
waste specification ranged from 0% to 100%. The Government should
investigate the reasons for these variations as a matter of urgency
and make publicly available the findings. (Paragraph 51.f).
42. Government is committed to buying copier paper
that is 100 per cent recycled and paper for printed publications
with a minimum 60 per cent recycled content[1].
The 2004 SDiG Report will record progress against this commitment.
The response to Recommendation 15(a) above comments on data relating
to purchasing of electricity from renewable sources. Given the
huge differences in departmental estates and activities, some
differences in performance are inevitable. Improved data collection
and monitoring of performance will, however, help to identify
areas of poor performance which are unrelated to such characteristics
and can be attributed to inadequate commitment, resources or other
cause.
43. The Government will look to Green Ministers to
investigate cases of poor performance in their Departments and
will welcome the continued assistance of the Committee to identify
these and also to set up more robust systems of monitoring which
will identify problems at an earlier stage.
Monitoring and reporting
Recommendation 16. It is disappointing that so
few departments produce their own sustainable development or environmental
reports. Departments must also not use the production of the Sustainable
Development in Government report as an excuse for not reporting
themselves (Paragraph 53).
Recommendation 17. We recommend that the Government
places on departments a formal requirement to report separately
on their environmental impacts and to include in these reports
coverage of not only the department itself and its agencies, but
its associate bodies also. (Paragraph 55).
44. Reporting of operational performance across the
Government Estate will continue in the annual SDiG Reports. Part
A of the Framework makes clear the Government view that cross-government
reporting cannot substitute for comprehensive performance reporting
by individual Departments. It placed on Departments an obligation
to report publicly on the key sustainable development impacts
of their estate operations. Government maintains that it is for
individual Departments to determine the most appropriate way for
them to report, whether in a free-standing sustainable development
report, or elsewhere including in the departmental annual report,
and whether to do so in hard copy or online.
45. All Departments now report on the sustainable
development impacts of their operations: six in separate reports,
seven within their Departments' annual reports and seven in another
way, mostly on their websites.
46. The Framework at present covers all central Government
Departments and their Executive Agencies. It does not cover Non-Departmental
Public Bodies and other associate bodies but Departments are responsible
for promoting sustainable development to these bodies and the
forthcoming review of the Framework will consider how this may
be further encouraged. Many associate bodies do already report
on environmental impacts in the normal course of their business.
47. Government will give further consideration during
2004 to how Departments can improve upon their reporting of sustainable
development outside the Framework, i.e. in a policy context.
It will be important to establish systems that do not duplicate
but rather draw on existing procedures and auditing arrangements.
Recommendation 18. While we would in no way wish
to downplay the importance of departmental initiatives, we would
not wish to see the Sustainable Development in Government Annual
Report become simply a presentational vehicle for highlighting
good practice. In our view, it should constitute a rigorous analysis
to enable ENV(G) to monitor progress effectively, adjusting priorities
and setting targets as required. (Paragraph 58).
Recommendation 19. We recommend that DEFRA, in
drafting the 2004 questionnaire, ensures that the questions it
contains are sufficiently specific to elicit reliable and comparable
data from departments. Departments should also be required to
indicate clearly where they consider questions are not relevant.
(Paragraph 59).
48. The Government agrees with the Committee that
the SDiG annual reports should provide a rigorous analysis and
enable effective monitoring of performance. The Government would
welcome the Committee's input to drafting the 2004 questionnaire
on operational issues. The format of the 2003 Report follows the
Framework for Sustainable Development on the Government Estate
(Framework), which makes a clear link between commitments and
reporting and enables departmental data to be compared. This year's
online Report records data on published targets and in areas where
targets are being developed.
49. As indicated above in the response to Recommendation
1, the Government will consider in 2004, options for reporting
on the mainstreaming of sustainable development into departmental
policies and will liaise with Committee officials accordingly.
Recommendation 20. We welcome the Framework for
Sustainable Development on the Government Estate as tangible evidence
of progress towards a more systematic and comprehensive approach
to cross-departmental target setting and monitoring. (Paragraph
60).
Recommendation 21. We are concerned about the
slow rate of progress in implementing the Framework. Five of its
nine constituent parts have still not been published—three
months after the date by which it should have been complete. (Paragraph
62).
50. The Government is pleased to receive support
for the Framework approach. Progress has been slower
than first envisaged. It is important that the sections are thought
through carefully and that the targets are both challenging and
realistic. The remaining sections when published later this year
should provide a sound basis for further substantive improvement
in departmental performance.
Recommendation 22. We recommend that, within 4
months of the announcement of each suite of targets, all departments
should submit their delivery strategies to the Environmental Audit
Committee or provide an explanation as to why they have not done
so. The Sustainable Development in Government web-site should
also include full provision for monitoring progress against targets.
(Paragraph 63).
51. Part A of the Framework requires all Departments
within four months of the announcement of each suite of targets
to make public a strategy showing how they plan to deliver the
targets. It was envisaged at that time that strategies should
be made available on departmental websites so that links could
be posted on the Framework website. The Government considers
that this remains appropriate and will look to ensure that from
this year the Framework website, which now forms a part
of the SDiG website, includes full provision for monitoring progress
against targets, including targets related to the development
of strategies.
Recommendation 23. We urge the Government to develop
a more systematic approach to environmental target setting in
a policy context as a complement to the systematic approach it
is now adopting for departmental operations and as a way of providing
greater accountability to Parliament through the EAC for environmentally
related policy targets. (Paragraph 64).
52. Responsibility for setting environmental targets
rests with different Departments, though usually in conjunction
with Defra, for example DfID and FCO (international sustainable
development), DTI (energy), DfT (jointly with Defra for air quality)
and Defra (waste). Targets are considered and developed in cross-government
fora and in the light of EU and international obligations. They
are brought together in the UK sustainable development strategy
and considered across the board in a number of arenas including
Cabinet Committees and the Spending Review. As indicated above
in response to Recommendations 11 and 12, the Government intends
to undertake further work to develop appraisal methodologies and
this will encompass reporting requirements.
Recommendation 24. While the quality of environmental
reporting by departments remains inadequate, it seems over-ambitious
to try to encompass social reporting as well. Indeed, the Sustainable
Development in Government report is very far from being comprehensive
in this respect. (Paragraph 66).
53. As explained above in the response to Recommendation
1, the Government intends to use the SDiG Report to monitor progress
on Framework targets. These relate principally to the
management of the Government's land and buildings and do not cover
policy making. However, to the extent that the business operations
of the Government Estate have social implications, whether on
staff or local communities, the Government considers that it is
appropriate for them to be covered in the Framework documents
and to be reported on in the annual SDiG Reports. The Government
intends to publish a Framework section on the social impacts
in the next few months.
Recommendation 25. We strongly feel that the term
'sustainable development' should be defined in such a way as to
include only those policies, objectives and targets in which environmental
aspects form a major component. (Paragraph 67).
54. The Government is disappointed that the Committee
continues to espouse an environmentally driven concept of sustainable
development. Both the international agenda and current UK strategy
recognise the importance of the social and economic aspects of
sustainable development.
55. The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)
and its outcomes reinforced the international consensus on integrating
the three pillars of sustainable development. Follow-up to the
Summit will require action at all levels and this includes delivering
the WTO's Doha Development Agenda and reaching the Millennium
Development Goals to eradicate global poverty. These aims are
central to achieving international sustainable development, and
were key elements of the WSSD agenda and resultant commitments.
For the UK to diverge from the international consensus on what
sustainable development means would significantly weaken its influence
internationally.
56. The 1999 UK sustainable development strategy,
(a better quality of life), sets out the Government's approach
to sustainable development, and explains that in practice it means
meeting four objectives at the same time, in the UK and the world
as a whole: social progress which recognises the needs of everyone;
effective protection of the environment; prudent use of natural
resources; and maintenance of high and stable levels of economic
growth and employment. The breadth of the strategy, including
the suite of 15 headline indicators, indicates the wide range
of activities that can and do contribute to achieving sustainable
development; this represents a challenge in terms of performance
and reporting against performance but one Government embraces.
The strategy is now being reviewed in order to have a new one
in place in 2005.
Recommendation 26. We recommend that the Government
should include, as part of its review of the Sustainable Development
Strategy, an evaluation of the impact of the strategy on departments
and the extent to which it has been successful in mainstreaming
environmental objectives. (Paragraph 68).
57. In spring 2004, the Government will publish the
fourth in the series of annual reports on the UK sustainable development
strategy (Achieving a better quality of life). This will
outline key developments in 2003 and also provide an overview
of Government progress since publication of the strategy, including
progress on embedding sustainable development in policy making.
The Sustainable Development Commission is also preparing an assessment
of progress.
Audit and accountability
Recommendation 27. The lack of accountability
which now exists in relation to departmental Sustainable Development
Reports submitted as part of Spending Review 2002 is unacceptable.
We will continue to demand greater transparency in this process
and for departments to be required to publish—perhaps on
a two-yearly basis as in Canada—their own sustainable development
reports. (Paragraph 70).
58. The Sustainable Development Reports which Departments
submitted with their bids for Spending Review (SR) 2002 were part
of a confidential intra-Government process. However, sustainable
development was reported on in the Spending Review White Paper
and many Departments report on the sustainable development aspects
of their activities in their own publications.
59. Sustainable development is one of a number of
cross-cutting thematic issues that will be considered as part
of SR2004. Departments will be required to submit their proposals
to the Treasury who will evaluate the various sustainable development
components, along with other horizontal Government priorities.
Recommendation 28. We find it surprising that
the Government did not feel that ENV could oversee the sustainable
energy strategy. If it has no role here, we question what effective
role it can play in any sphere of Government activity, and indeed
how its role can be clearly differentiated from that of ENV(G).
(Paragraph 73).
60. Government considered it appropriate that oversight
of the sustainable energy strategy should lie with the Cabinet
Committee with overall responsibility for Britain's energy policy.
DA(N)'s terms of reference are "to consider the principles
and objectives which underlie Great Britain's energy strategy;
and to report as necessary to the Committee on Domestic Affairs";
its membership is very similar to that of ENV. Key Ministers,
working informally through the Ministerial Group on Implementation
of the Energy White Paper reporting to DA(N), focus on detailed
delivery of the sustainable energy strategy.
61. The terms of reference of ENV and ENV(G) reflect
their close relationship (ENV is the parent committee of ENV(G)
and has a more senior membership) and differentiate their roles.
ENV(G) seeks "to consider the impact on sustainable development
of Government policies" and "to improve the performance
of Departments in contributing to sustainable development".
On this, it reports to ENV, which additionally "considers
UK environmental policies". Generally speaking, ENV(G)
focuses on the sustainable development aspects of how Government
does its business; ENV has oversight of this ENV(G) work but additionally
takes individual decisions on specific environmental policies.
Recommendation 29. Our work has involved considerable
analysis which the NAO would be ideally placed to carry out. We
would therefore welcome the NAO's assistance in analysing future
reports and associated evidence, in the form of a management report
and accompanying analyses submitted to this Committee on an annual
basis. The publication of the next Sustainable Development in
Government annual report, due very shortly, offers an opportunity
to begin the process. (Paragraph 75).
Recommendation 30. Our annual review may well
highlight specific areas which require further investigation.
For this reason, we would also welcome the assistance of the NAO
in carrying out detailed studies on specific aspects of departmental
performance. Such assistance would materially help us carry out
our audit function in a timely and effective manner. (Paragraph
76).
62. As indicated in our introductory remarks above
(paragraph 2), the Government is strongly committed to integrating
sustainable development into its policies and practices and will
work with the Committee and other expert bodies, including the
National Audit Office, to improve its performance and reporting.
Defra and the NAO have begun discussions to consider how work
by the NAO on sustainable development in Government can help the
Committee to carry out its audit function and to strengthen departmental
performance and reporting on sustainable development.
1 As of Government announcement on 30th
October 2003 on sustainable procurement Back
| 
