Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-73)
RT HON
JOHN PRESCOTT
MP AND MR
RICHARD MCCARTHY
7 FEBRUARY 2006
Q60 Sir Paul Beresford: I am sorry,
the words are too difficult for me as well because English is
a second language for me, but that is what he said, I am quoting.
Mr Prescott: Do not be patronising.
Q61 Sir Paul Beresford: I am not.
Mr Prescott: You are.
Q62 Sir Paul Beresford: If I am—
Mr Prescott: Just apologise for
it and I will accept it.
Q63 Sir Paul Beresford: Okay, I will
apologise—
Mr Prescott: I would say do we
get sufficient joined-up action from other government departments?
Not enough. Have we got quite a lot? Yes, we have but not enough,
and we are now requiring more and more delivery to be on the basis
of integrated thinking and integrated decision-making. It is not
always easy in departments to achieve that when often that proportion
of expenditure that we are interested in to achieve our targets
is a small part of the departments' expenditure. So we get worried
basically if some of the targets we have we have not reached simply
because we have not concentrated the minds of other departments
to give it that kind of priority. That is the difficulty about
getting integration. That is what David will be referring to.
It is not joined-up enough. We are in fact trying to give more
of the decisions down to the local authorities. The local area
agreements were very successful, which I brought in, where local
authorities are now working with other agencies can make their
own decisions and everybody thinks that has been quite successful.
In fact, more and more local authorities are asking for local
area agreements.
Mr Hands: And then they overrule them.
Chair: Mr Hands, can you please speak
only through the Chair. Ignore that. Martin?
Q64 Martin Horwood: To come back
to the Bristol Accord—
Mr Prescott: Back to the Bristol
Accord? Welcome!
Q65 Martin Horwood: Yes, we are back
on the subject. One of the characteristics in the document says
that sustainable communities should actively seek to minimise
climate change including through energy efficiency and the use
of renewables. In the document there are inspiring examples from
Helsinki and Rotterdam, in particular, of really imaginative ways
of using the built environment to increase the use of renewables.
One of the best ways of doing that obviously is through micro
generation, through the use of solar power or combined heat and
power or miniature wind turbines. I have talked to social housing
providers who say they cannot afford to do that at the moment
and I have talked to private housing providers who say it does
not command a price premium so they will not do it either. What
is your Department doing to fulfil that objective?
Mr Prescott: I think you are on
to a very powerful point there because in the main it is trying
to get the economies of scale to bring in a great deal of these
improvements. We are very much considering, particularly within
the housing package, that we might do that because we need to
make a breakthrough really. Everybody says it is too expensive
and there is not enough demand for it. Yes, there have been very
good examples in the areas you mentioned, and Denmark as well
I think. At the end of the day tied in with energy policy and
the environmental requirements that we have got now in meeting
our targets it is an increasingly important part of our intention.
I think in our achievements and contributions to carbon reduction
in housing and building we have done very well, but there is a
lot more to be done, quite frankly, so we are having to look at
how we get a better balance, and that was one of the questions
that certainly comes to mind. Can we break out of this cycle to
provide a sufficient demand so that we can reduce the cost that
is involved and perhaps make it a regular part of housing?
Q66 Martin Horwood: Thank you. That
is an encouraging reply but I hope it is looked at.
Mr Prescott: I hope to make some
kind of statement about that shortly because I think the whole
housing one is the one that we are very much looking at now and
hopefully quite soon we will try to answer your question.
Mr McCarthy: It is worth being
aware of the improvements to Part L of the building regulations
which have secured a 40% improvement in the energy efficiency
of new housing in the space of only four years. Also, as we published
in the consultation document for the Code for Sustainable Buildings,
which I am aware you raised this morning with the Prime Minister,
we are also continuing our work to see what else can be done to
drive forward beyond that point in terms of the energy efficiency
of both existing and new homes.
Martin Horwood: I think a lot remains
to be done on the Code for Sustainable Buildings.
Chair: Anne?
Q67 Anne Main: I would just like
to take you back to the point you made before about communicating
your ideas. It is vital that other departments buy in, as you
said. In the report the communication strands were being criticised.
What measures are you putting in place to ensure that there is
greater communication between your Department and other departments
to help facilitate the Bristol Accord?
Mr Prescott: Of course, the way
governments normally do it is basically through the Cabinet committees
and we have a Cabinet committee which I chair that tries to do
that. I would be less than honest if I said I have not had Cabinet
committees call for these supports. It is quite a wearing thing
trying to get local government to recognise something that is
not so crucial in the departments but crucial for the delivery
of these overall objectives for which we have a direct responsibility.
All we can do is to continue pushing to achieve those objectives.
Of course, they get reassessed as we go along with the public
expenditure reviews and, as you know, the new public expenditure
review is on the horizon so the priorities and targets and all
those things will be related to that. I would argue and I am arguing
that if you look at some of the targets across government perhaps
from our point of view of achieving an overall target it is better
to give some more importance to these overall departmental targets.
Q68 Anne Main: Are you satisfied
with the communications structure as it is then? You are not going
to make any improvements or any changes, because it was criticised
in the report?
Mr Prescott: I do not think the
problem is communication; it is getting them to do it. We are
communicating, we are talking. Anybody who has had any experience
of government knows how it works in departments. I am sure your
colleague will tell you. It would be lovely if I sent a memo round
from the Deputy Prime Minister: "Please do X, Y and Z."
Q69 Anne Main: There was criticism
about bullying but it says here—
Mr Prescott: Do not just throw
that in. Let me just answer that. I will not answer the bullying
argument like that.
Anne Main: There was criticism about
the way the communication came from the top.
Chair: Anne, you are mixing two issues.
I do not want that issue to be raised at this very late stage.
Q70 Anne Main: It says: "External
stakeholders remain to be convinced that the Department will ensure
the co-ordinated government action which is needed to meet its
goals", and that is really fundamental.
Mr Prescott: I know and I have
just given you an answer to that as best I can. When you get experience
of government you will find it is not so easy—and that will
be a long time away.
Q71 Mr Betts: One of the objectives
of the UK Presidency was to try and sort out this problem of state
aid, particularly for regeneration projects, which I think appeared
as a problem in 1999 when the EU effectively stopped state aid
as we had previously given it for private companies working on
regeneration schemes. I was wondering how much progress you think
we have made during the Presidency and where we are up to now
in terms of the state aid issues?
Mr Prescott: As you know, this
is a constant, running argument, as we found with English Partnerships
when, if you remember, we wanted to build a factory and we were
told we could not do the pre-building suddenly because it was
state aid. Eventually we were able to argue and find our way through
that. It is a constant, running problem with the European Commission.
We have had to do it with the regional funds and see how much
of this is state aid. If you remember what used to happen on the
regional policy issue was that you got the policy if you were
below the 75% of GDP and therefore defined to be a deprived area
and that applied across Europe, but if you wanted to come in and
give any extra money to that or use it via the state itself supplementing
it, it was always considered state aid. We broke away from that
and most of the programmes we have got here now will be able to
use it in a way that does not accuse them of being state-aided
developments. That is another step forward that we discussed at
the Bristol Accord, but I think it is a constant, running argument
about competition, subsidy and state aid.
Mr McCarthy: Can I say that the
DTI is about to consult on new proposals for state aid and just
give you some reassurance. The EU guidelines, which set out the
policy for structural funds, have identified the sustainable communities
approach as an important way of integrating economic, social and
environmental issues so there is some impact being made through
the six months of the Presidency.
Q72 Mr Betts: So are we getting the
message through to the Commission that the way we do things in
this country is slightly different and perhaps they are a bit
more relaxed about it?
Mr McCarthy: I think they have
been listening.
Mr Prescott: It is a constant
battle, you know that.
Q73 Mr Betts: In terms of the temporary
replacements for English Partnerships' Partnership Investment
Programme, we have got some temporary measures in place which
come to an end this year. Have we got a way out of that particular
issue?
Mr McCarthy: We will have to come
back on that specifically.
Mr Prescott: I was talking to
English Partnerships about these new programmes, some go, some
do not, but I will write to the Committee to see where we are
on that, Chair.
Chair: Can I thank you very much indeed,
Secretary of State. Time has obviously been going so pleasantly
you had not noticed time passing. We look forward to your Department's
response to our first report and a continued dialogue between
us. Thank you very much.
| 
