Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-48)
20 OCTOBER 2004
ELLIOT MORLEY
MP, MS LINDSAY
CORNISH AND
MS SUE
ELLIS
Q40 Mr Chaytor: Thank you, Chair. Could
I veer equally violently towards energy and efficiency! I understand
that the new draft Energy Efficiency Commitment Order is about
to be published and I am curious about the status of micro-generation
because the department's policy on micro-generation was that the
support would be given subject to the field trials.
Mr Morley: Yes, that is right.
Q41 Mr Chaytor: But this would mean that
support for micro-generation would not be included in the Energy
Efficiency Commitment Order, even if the field trials were to
prove to be successful.
Mr Morley: Yes.
Q42 Mr Chaytor: Yesterday I was with
an all-party group, of which I am a member, with the Treasury
and the Treasury's view of this is slightly different, I think,
because they are giving support to micro-generation, which would
include it in the Energy Efficiency Commitment Order. As things
stand alone with DEFRA it will not be until the following three
years. The current Order would be 2005 and 2008, and even though
you could approve the field trials by 2005 or 2006, it will then
have to wait until the next Energy Efficiency Commitment Order
period.
Mr Morley: It is certainly true
that the intention was to wait for the field trials, to look at
the whole life assessments and the kinds of assessments which
have to be done these days. Certainly from what I have seen of
micro-CHP, it seems to offer tremendous potential actually, and
I think if that potential is demonstrated it is something that
we would want to see. I was not aware that the cycle of waiting
for the approval would put it back to 2008. That is something
I am going to have to look at in the department.
Q43 Mr Chaytor: Could we ask you to look
at that again?
Mr Morley: I would be very happy
to look at that for you.
Q44 Mr Chaytor: If the Order includes
reference to approval subject to the field trials, that would
enable it to be included in the 2005, 2008 Commitment Order.
Mr Morley: It sounds to me that
it is interpretation in relation to time scales and regulations
here, but I would be very happy to take that back to the department,
Chairman, and I will write to you on behalf of the Committee.
Chairman: Can we lurch sickeningly back
towards timber! Joan Walley.
Q45 Joan Walley: Thank you, Chairman.
What I am keen to explore, you mentioned what government is doing,
how it applies to non-government departments. What about PFI objects?
What about the government's NHS estate? What about all the new
house building that we expect under the Sustainable Communities
Plan? Are we going to have a proper European licensing system
like they have in Denmark? And are you confident that the central
point of expertise on timber is fully resourced and will be under
phase II? I have rushed all those questions together.
Mr Morley: On the last point,
I certainly have the resources to start on the phase II and I
am very glad to say that, unusually, from governments, I have
asked other government departments to contribute to CPET on the
basis that they will benefit from its services. Some have contributed
through their buying agencies, some have contributed very generously.
The Devolveds have been very supportive, I might say. Others have
said they are willing to pay for the services and we will have
to sort that out with them because if others are contributing
then they will have to pay. Those who have offered money have
also said they want to be involved with it because it also gives
ownership from government departments, and I think that is a very
good thing and I am very keen to encourage it. In relation to
PFI, I gave a speech two weeks ago in relation to government procurement
and we have set a target for January next year for each department
to bring forward a strategy in relation to sustainable procurement
because I think that government procurement is the most fantastic
tool that we are not utilising to its full effect because of the
strength. In fact, I saw some very interesting figures about the
size of the government's procurement budget, which is bigger than
some countries' whole GDP. So that will be done and I would expect
to see in those strategies issues such as sustainable timber being
a contract condition in future PFIs. I think that we can tighten
up PFI contracts in relation to a whole range of sustainable issues,
and timber is one of them.
Q46 Joan Walley: Can I ask what discussions
you are having with those companies that wish to develop a policy
of using sustainable and legally produced timber, to make sure
that you can ensure that we do not have cowboys operating here—you
have a proper licensing system?
Mr Morley: That is one of the
intents of the Central Point of Expertise, and that will list
all the recognised certification schemes that are reputable and
reliable.
Q47 Joan Walley: What about those that
do not comply with that? What about those which are outside that?
Will it be extended to a licensing system, as I understand they
have in Denmark?
Mr Morley: I would prefer to have
a certification system rather than a licensing system because
of all the complications that go with that, although I am very
happy to look at the Danish experience. I think what we should
be moving to is a norm that timber is fully certified or can demonstrate
by independent assessment, which will be even more expensive than
a certification scheme, that it is of equivalence. So that is
where we should get to in relation to our government procurement.
Q48 Chairman: There is the bell again.
Thank you very much indeed, Minister, for your time. As I say,
we will be writing to you about the other issues.
Mr Morley: You are very welcome,
I am sorry it was a bit truncated.
| 
