Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320-339)
11 JANUARY 2005
MR PAUL
ALLEN AND
MS ANN
MCGARRY
Q320 Chairman: Just before we leave that,
could I follow up in terms of what you are doing there whether
or not Estyn, who we had before us previously, are aware of what
you are doing there and if it is part of their 10-year plan to
address this as far as teachers are concerned?
Ms McGarry: I do not think they
are aware of what we are doing. I find the problem in Wales is
in terms of communication. There is nobody like the CEE which
is a meeting point for people, communication and networking for
bodies within Wales, so there is not an easy mechanism for Estyn
to know what we are doing short of us approaching them.
Q321 Chairman: They mentioned a panel,
did they not, when they were here? Would there be any scope for
you to be on that panel?
Ms McGarry: I do not even know
who makes the decisions about who goes on that panel.
Q322 Chairman: In a way what this has
highlighted is that at the institutional level where these mechanisms
and procedures are drawn up who should be involved and consulted
about what and where somehow or other you need to be slotted into
that procedure.
Ms McGarry: I think so, but what
I feel is that a panel can only have a certain number of people
on it and there are all sorts of organisations in Wales that are
doing all sorts of things. There is not this network where they
can communicate and they cannot all be on that panel, so there
is, I feel, a lack of a communication system.
Q323 Chairman: You do not feel part of
something bigger?
Ms McGarry: No. We have some really
good contacts directly. In fact, what was the Sustainable Development
Unit has now gone to the Strategic Policy Unit, so that is quite
significant, but the Strategic Policy Unit in Wales is stuffed
full of people who are extremely good on sustainable development
and we have had some very good contacts with them and with other
bodies, but that is a direct contact we had there.
Q324 Mr Challen: In your written evidence
you say "the almost continual stream of accepted science
reaching the headlines has significantly reinforced the message
that business as usual can continue and that `contraction and
convergence' is a clear global priority". Is it really a
continual stream of accepted science, or indeed other news stories?
Is it really percolating downwards or is it, if you like, a broadsheet
concern? Is it perhaps running the risk of creating a sort of
environmental fatigue amongst people who get sick of all the bad
news and just want to turn away from it without getting to the
stage of looking at the solutions like C&C?
Mr Allen: Our approach has always
been to be solutions-driven. We deal with the problems by presenting
the solutions, which is so much more uplifting for those who have
to and will have to continually hear it. The problems are not
going to decrease and go away; they are going to remain. What
I would be particularly interested in is the robust science that
is coming out of the coupled carbon modules that the Hadley Centre
are developing. Now they are getting other researchers with other
different types of computer models to model the same events and
more or less the results are coming out the same, that El Niño
will become an annual phenomenon in a few decades' time which
will result in a massive die-back of the Amazon basin, releasing
huge amounts of stored carbon back into the atmosphere which will
dwarf the amount that we give up in a year. Scientifically it
went back to the fact that they lost half the carbon. They looked
at how much carbon we give off every year as a matter of public
record and the rise in concentration in the atmosphere was only
about half what we are giving off, so that led to the search for
the carbon sinks which pointed to the fact that it is not the
carbon that we give off that is the problem; it is the changes
we make in the huge natural carbon cycle. We are tinkering with
a very big thing.
Ms McGarry: I am driven to frustration
frequently by things on Radio 4 which just take the superficial
view and do not use the scientists from the Hadley Centre; they
pick on somebody who wants to say, "Oh, climate change is
not really happening", or, "That is not really serious",
and so it is not getting beyond that. Even the broadsheets at
times are using that popular attitude which is not using the really
serious science. I think it is improving a bit but it is not good
enough.
Q325 Mr Challen: Perhaps another approach
which I think is probably one which would go down well with the
public, maybe for the wrong reasons, is that if you have this
continual stream of accepted and very profound science which makes
it all look so inevitable, people will say, "There are not
solutions but we can adapt", and the Copenhagen Consensus
is all about that kind of approach, just having to live with it.
Are there ways that you can convey to people that there are better
means of tackling it which are realistically possible?
Ms McGarry: One example is that
very recently there has been a programme on Welsh language television
where the back-up was provided by CAT and it was working with
a group of families looking at reducing their impact and their
carbon footprint particularly. Some of them did incredibly well.
They reduced their impact to less than a quarter of what it had
been in the first place. I do not know if you saw it. I do not
know how popular that would be on S4C but it seemed to be a really
good programme. It was a positive thing; it was working with these
people. It was quite a good feeling from them about their experience
of doing it as well. We need more support for that sort of positive
approach. I find it very difficult sometimes, talking to 17-year
olds and getting them to see a whole variety of things that include
issues of global poverty, trading issues and climate change, and
you do not want to leave them sitting there looking incredibly
depressed and hopeless about it, and that positive action is extremely
important. Unfortunately, we do have to accept that one of the
things we need to convey to people is that adaptation is now the
only way forward because we cannot keep things as they are.
Q326 Mr Challen: Do you see any evidence
which shows that C&C is now becoming an idea whose time has
come, not least amongst higher policy makers?
Ms McGarry: Contraction and conversion?
Q327 Mr Challen: Yes.
Ms McGarry: Yes. It seems to be
being talked about a lot more.
Mr Allen: The useful thing is
that it brings in the international equity perspective but relates
that to your actual carbon footprint and your carbon quota that
you will have as a UK person and linking the two things is a very
powerful tool because if we can begin to address the international
equity we can begin to work for a more peaceful world.
Ms McGarry: There is a huge difficulty
there. One of the things that depressed me in looking at both
of the documents down in Wales is that they both talk about the
needs of business. With the English document that was the only
driver of curriculum, if you like. The rest of it was all about
structure. With the Wales document there definitely was reference
to sustainable development. Business is interested in producing
more things and selling more things and that is an enormous problem
when we are looking at contraction. It is looking at the needs
of business and nowhere do the English documents say anything
about the needs of people or the needs of the planet. Obviously,
if you are going to provide for the needs of people you have to
produce things, but there are all sorts of ways in which we could
do that with a much lower impact. It just felt like we have got
to have some other drivers in there for what is going to be in
the curriculum.
Q328 Mr Challen: Looking very briefly
at the DfES Action Plan, your response to a question about whether
it is a success or failure was just one line, "It seems very
regrettable that the ESD Panel is still not in place to advise
the Department". I am just wondering if you could tell us
a bit about what has been the impact of the absence of the ESD
Panel.
Ms McGarry: I do not have enough
direct evidence to say. I just felt that the reports that it produced
were very clear, very down-to-earth, particularly the last one
which I thought was admirably clear, in plain language and very
useful advice. That did not seem to be reflected in the DfES Action
Plan that came out just after it closed.
Q329 Mr Challen: Are you at all encouraged
by what you heard earlier this afternoon from our Defra witnesses?
Ms McGarry: No.
Q330 Mr Challen: Finally from me in regard
to the DfES Action Plan, do you think it has started a process
of change and what sort of achievements, if the answer if yes,
would you point to in order to demonstrate that progress?
Ms McGarry: I do not feel that
my knowledge of what is going on in education in English schools
is good enough to be able to say. One thing that I have been involved
in is producing some materials on citizenship and sustainability
for design and technology education for QCA. That sort of thing
is happening. Those sorts of materials are being produced.
Q331 Mr Thomas: We have covered some
of the areas already that I was going to ask about. You have had
a very good stab in your evidence at writing the Sustainable Development
Strategy so we will take that as read. From what Mr Challen has
asked you and from the evidence you heard earlier from Defra,
how do you perceive the fact that education on sustainable development
is with one department and the overall lead for sustainable development
is with another department? How is that impacting on the Sustainable
Development Strategy for the UK?
Ms McGarry: I have been very unimpressed
by what has come of the DfES and I have been very surprised by
that. Frankly, there must be some people in that department who
understand what sustainable development is about, I would have
thought, but it does not seem to be there. It just does not seem
to work. There does not appear to be communication between departments
or co-operation between departments. I do not know. That is very
much an outsider's view.
Q332 Mr Thomas: But you do some work
in England as well as in Wales?
Ms McGarry: Yes, we do. We work
with schools.
Q333 Mr Thomas: Is that only down to
a statutory duty placed on the National Assembly, for example,
or do you perceive it as something more institutional?
Ms McGarry: There are lots of
things happening in Wales but I do not see how much of it is coming
out of the Education Department in Wales. I do not really know,
partly because of this lack of very much communication. One of
the things I looked at yesterday was the document from the Higher
Education Council for Wales which I thought was extremely good,
a really clear, thorough policy for higher education institutions.
I thought that was great, so if that reflects what is going to
happen in other areas that is really good.
Q334 Mr Thomas: Not necessarily though.
Ms McGarry: The 14-19 document
does not reflect the same approach.
Q335 Mr Thomas: That is what I was going
to ask you because you mentioned earlier your disappointment in
the 14-19 document in England and I think in Wales as well to
a slightly lesser extent
Ms McGarry: Yes.
Q336 Mr Thomas: Tomlinson, for example,
is the basis presumably for the next White Paper for education
in England. Do you have any thinking as to why education for sustainable
development has been so poorly served within these documents?
Ms McGarry: I do not know. If
you read something like that and you read something like the higher
education one in Wales, the difference is staggering.
Q337 Mr Thomas: Does it reflect what
you said earlier about the evidence from the DfES? You were disappointed
with their past performance and perhaps that has been reflected
in what has been taken by Tomlinson out of that?
Ms McGarry: Presumably. I just
do not know.
Q338 Mr Thomas: How much do you work
within England as compared to Wales?
Ms McGarry: There is one project
we are involved in for the Sustainable Design Award, which is
working with design and technology at A-level in schools. It is
a joint project between us and the Intermediate Technology Development
Group and so they are running it in England and we are running
it in Wales. We are doing a lot of work together, so I am doing
some work for that, so doing teacher training in England, but
we get visited by a very large number of schools from England
so that is our main other area of contact.
Q339 Mr Thomas: Are they coming as part
of education for sustainable development?
Ms McGarry: I am not sure how
many of them would stick that label on what they are doing.
| 
