Independence
40. The announcement that English Nature was to be
subsumed into the new Integrated Agency attracted some criticism,
with press reports speculating that it might be Government's "revenge
for the watchdog's successful opposition to GM crops".[74]
The environmental organisation, Friends of the Earth, was adamant
that what was needed was "a wildlife watchdog, not a Government
poodle". It felt that the "laws setting up the new body
will be the real test of the Government's intentions".[75]
41. Many witnesses welcomed the Secretary of State's
confirmation of the independent status of the Integrated Agency
as a non-departmental public body.[76]
English Nature felt this assurance was absolutely critical and
was keen to ensure the independence was not eroded in the process
of drafting the legislation.[77]
Evidence from the CPRE seemed to capture the importance witnesses
attached to the independent status of the Integrated Agency. It
said:
We wish the legislation to make it blindingly clear
that we have a bone crackingly independent force … that it
has a constitution and a council which is not influenced beyond
the expertise of those appointed to it: that it has a seamlessly
good connection with its existing expertise and the different
elements which are being brought together and that it should have
an independence of research commissioning.[78]
42. The Minister argued that the Integrated Agency
would be independent, in the same way as the Environment Agency
and English Nature. The Rural Development Service element of the
new Agency would in fact be more independent than before. He stressed
that the Agency would not be a body "which in detail would
be interfered with by the Secretary of State".[79]
Provisions of the draft NERC Bill allow the Secretary of State
to give wide-ranging guidance and directions as to the exercise
of the Integrated Agency's functions.[80]
The draft Bill also gives the Secretary of State power to appoint
any number of members to the Agency, after consulting the Chairman.[81]
These powers were seen by some witnesses as potentially compromising
the agency's independence.[82]
We consider these aspects of the draft Bill in more detail in
Chapter 12 of our Report.
43. We welcome
Ministers' confirmation of the independent status of the Integrated
Agency as a non-departmental public body, as in order for it to
be successful, it is important that it has a strong independent
voice and credibility among its stakeholders. The independence
of the new Agency must be clearly enshrined in its establishing
legislation. We examine how this can be reflected
in the text of the draft Bill in Chapter 12 of our report.
Resources
44. English Nature stressed the need for the Integrated
Agency to be "sufficiently resourced to continue the progress
towards meeting a number of the Government's environmental targets
and objectives".[83]
It was concerned that the potential cost savings, which could
be achieved as a consequence of the integration, should not come
to be regarded as a principal driver of the change process. English
Nature concluded by saying that "penny-pinching now would
doom the future of a successful integrated agency".[84]
CPRE argued that the Agency needed to be "resourced satisfactorily
to achieve all its statutory purposes". In evidence on the
draft Bill, English Nature told us that the budget for the Integrated
Agency had not yet been set, but the plan was for budgets to be
"carried through" from those parts of existing bodies
that were being transferred to the new Agency. There were "clear
opportunities for efficiency savings to be gained" from the
merger of the different bodies, including a reduction in the number
of senior and middle managers, back office efficiency gains and
estate rationalisation. For this reason the agreed efficiency
targets, though demanding, were achievable. Programme budgets
were "not necessarily going to be squeezed".[85]
45. We agree with
the Government that it should be possible to realise some efficiency
savings when setting up the new Integrated Agency, as overheads
from the different elements that make it up can be streamlined.
However, the new Integrated Agency must have sufficient resources
to carry out the tasks it has been set, and should not be expected
to deliver the level of programmes it has inherited on a reduced
programme budget. The Government should also publish a detailed
breakdown of how it proposes to use the Integrated Agency's establishment
budget, taking into account its requirement to slim down Defra's
workforce and simultaneously fund the birth of the new Agency
and associated developments.
49 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs,
Rural Strategy 2004 Fact Sheet: Integrated Agency in England,
(London, 2004), p 1 Back
50
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Rural Strategy
2004, (London, 2004), p 36 Back
51
Ev 106 Back
52
Q 263 Back
53
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Draft Natural
Environment and Rural Communities Bill, Cm 6460, February
2005, p 2 [emphasis added] Back
54
Appendix 3, para 2.1.1 Back
55
Appendix 11, paras 3, 8, 13 Back
56
Ev 40; and Qq 85, Appendix 11, paras 9-10 Back
57
Ev 59 Back
58
Qq 440-42 Back
59
Ev 98-99, Appendix 3, para 2.1.5 Back
60
Ev 26 Back
61
Ibid. Back
62
Q 135 Back
63
Ev 8; Q 135 Back
64
Ev 8 Back
65
Ev 11 Back
66
Q 297 Back
67
Q 37 Back
68
Qq 37-38 Back
69
Appendix 18 para 2.3; and Qq 353-56 Back
70
Q 213 Back
71
Ev 85 Back
72
Ibid. Back
73
Ibid. Back
74
"Ministers retreat from plan to scrap countryside watchdogs",
Independent on Sunday, 9 November 2003, p 16 Back
75
"England's wildlife watchdog threatened with extinction",
Friends of the Earth press release, 21 July 2004 Back
76
HC Deb, 24 February 2004, col 11WS Back
77
Q 202 Back
78
Q 267 Back
79
Qq 547-50 Back
80
Clauses 15 and 16 Back
81
Schedule 1, para 3(1) Back
82
E.g. English Nature, Appendix 5, para 15, Wildlife Trusts, Appendix
17, para 18 Back
83
Ev 75 Back
84
Q 202 Back
85
Qq 486-93; Appendix 5(a), paras 5-6 Back
