Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100-119)
SIR IAN
ANDREWS, MS
HELEN GHOSH
AND MR
NIGEL SMITH
29 APRIL 2008
Q100 Mr Chaytor: So presumably it
will be less than 30% by 2012?
Mr Smith: Yes.
Ms Ghosh: Yes.
Q101 Mr Chaytor: So therefore we
are talking of the vast majority of the reductions by 2012 being
achieved by offsets, so it is not a question of the last resort.
Ms Ghosh: Zero carbon in our buildings,
not our overall carbon emissions. It does not take into account
transport and all the other things we do which produce carbon.
Sir Ian Andrews: It is a carbon
neutral government office estate by 2012, whereas the wider figures
apply to the whole estate.
Ms Ghosh: Everything we do.
Q102 Mr Chaytor: Can I clarify this?
The 30% by 2020, does that not apply to the government estate?
Ms Ghosh: As one of the elements
which produce carbon, yes.
Q103 Mr Chaytor: Let me just get
this absolutely right. By 2012 it is carbon neutral on the government
estate.
Sir Ian Andrews: On the government
office estate.
Q104 Mr Chaytor: Government office
estate, okay. By 2020 it is a 30% reduction in emissions on government
buildings.
Sir Ian Andrews: The whole government
estate.
Q105 Mr Chaytor: What is the difference
between the government office estate and the whole government
set of buildings?
Sir Ian Andrews: A very large
part of that, as I said earlier, is actually the operational defence
estate, which is some 66% of the totality of the government estate.
Other departments also have their operational estate—Defra
laboratories, prisons and so on. Therefore the target is 30% across
the whole piece and carbon neutrality by 2012 on the government
office estate. I think I have seen in written evidence that has
been put to the Committee by other witnesses suggestions that
the targets may not be challenging or stretching enough. We were
very clear that is a hugely challenging and stretching target.
As I said earlier, I am encouraged by the real traction we are
now building up, and a lot of the things we put in the Government's
evidence is those things which have happened since the period
covered by the SDC Report which gives me real optimism for how
we move this forward.
Q106 Mr Chaytor: So in terms of 2012,
are there any other significant exemptions other than the wider
MoD estate?
Sir Ian Andrews: There are parts
of the government operational estate which I have mentioned, so
Defra laboratories—
Q107 Mr Chaytor: So Defra laboratories
would be excluded?
Ms Ghosh: Would be excluded. And
I assume, though we would need to confirm this with the Committee,
carbon emissions from road vehicles are excluded from the definition
of a carbon neutral government estate[21].
Sir Ian Andrews: Yes.
Ms Ghosh: So transport is added
into the total 30% reduction.
Q108 Mr Chaytor: If I can just come
back to the Report which is going to be produced this summer indicating
the trajectory, would that have an analysis of the likely cost
of achieving the zero carbon status of the government office estate
by 2012 in respect of the purchase of credits as against increasing
the efficiency of your buildings?
Mr Smith: To be frank, I do not
know. What I do know is that we have said in our response—and
certainly I did when I talked to the NAO—that part of the
job we have to do is define what carbon neutrality means and how
it relates to departments. So it is said quite clearly that OGC
in terms of the centre of excellence and Defra are going to get
their heads together to work it out, because I do not know what
it means, I have to be honest with you. As far as the focus of
the delivery plans are concerned, the delivery plans will be,
how do we get from where we are currently to our targets, so in
order to answer that question, you are quite right, on carbon
neutrality we have to first of all define what carbon neutrality
is so departments can work out whether they can achieve it or
not.
Ms Ghosh: Yes.
Q109 Mr Stuart: So will you be able
to write to the Committee later in the year and let us know what
percentage you are at and how many offsets you expect to require
by 2012, once you have your trajectory? Given this Committee is
pretty dubious about a lot of the offsets and their value and
their true additionality, and I cannot speak for all members of
the Committee, I think there would be a lot of misgiving if major
amounts of money were spent on what we would consider to be dubious
offsets—
Ms Ghosh: Absolutely.
Q110 Mr Stuart:— when there
was still a huge amount of work to be done for the Government
to transform and lower its carbon emissions in order to meet the
2020 target, and it would be a misallocation of resources in a
way to be spending it on offsets when it should just carry on
improving its own performance all the way to 2020.
Ms Ghosh: On the point about offsets,
we entirely agree on this point and whether there are snake oil
sales persons out there, so we launched an informal, now a formal,
consultation on a quality assurance scheme for carbon offsetting,
so you can be guaranteed when you are booking your flight or whatever
it may be that the carbon offset you are buying is genuine. We
are consulting at the moment and will be introducing a certification
scheme later this year, so you will be able to rely on the offset.
Q111 Joan Walley: We have touched
on the issue of carbon neutrality and what that means, I would
like to move us on to what we mean by greening the government
estate. One of the concerns that I have is where the outsourcing
of contracts, where the PFI and the privatised contracts, actually
fit. We have already had a reference to Trillium. If we are into
a situation or scenario where there is ever increasing privatised
outsourcing of contracts, where does that fit in terms of them
being outside the remit of the targets that are being set and
the progression of missing targets when, if you like, the government
estate is getting smaller and smaller? If I may just refer you
to the National Audit Office Report, it sets out quite clearly
that Target E6 " ... required all departments to include
clauses to ensure opportunities are identified and measures taken
for reducing carbon emissions and collecting energy data as far
as practical in all estate management contracts initiated from
August 2004 ... ". The note that follows that was provided
to us by the National Audit Office is, " ... neither of these
targets has been retained under the SOGE initiative and to this
extent they have been effectively abandoned." So how does
that square with government wanting to set targets? Presumably
if Trillium was being let now, that would not be a factor which
was in it. What is being done about all this?
Mr Smith: The issue is actually
the point that Ian was making before and really it is a change
in the way targets are looked at. These are outcome-based targets.
These buildings are in the outcome objectives which have been
set by Government, absolutely clearly. As I understand it, 95%—and
there is still 5% we have to tackle—of all IT outsourced
FM contracts and property outsourced FM contracts have got sustainability
clauses in them. They are very definitely on the ePIMS database
of government property, so we collect the information, and they
will be part of the benchmarking service, so we can look at the
relative performance of different buildings in the estate. So
the answer is most definitely they are included. If you look at
the largest one, which is DWP, which comes into the Land Securities
Trillium contract, they have got very clear sustainability targets.
They have a programme called Rise, the Re-launched Initiative
on Sustainable Energy, where they have a joint target between
themselves and their supplier to get 10% savings of energy and
water, I think over the next 18 months, which is a pretty ambitious
target. So, yes, they are included.
Q112 Joan Walley: Could you tell
us what proportion of emissions from government operations are
from outsourced or privatised operations?
Mr Smith: I cannot actually specifically
answer that, but what I can do is give you the percentages of
the government estate and how it is split between freehold, leasehold
and PFI or outsourced contracts. The freehold is 42%,[22]
if I remember correctly, the leasehold is 28%, and the PFI/outsourced
is the remainder, which, if I am right, is another 28%. I am pretty
sure that is correct.[23]
Q113 Joan Walley: Just to get this absolutely
clear, all PFI contracts will have this sustainability target
included in them?
Mr Smith: Yes, absolutely. The
only instance where property would cease to be part of the targets
is if that agency or whatever was privatised, like QinetiQ for
example.
Q114 Joan Walley: But it could well
be.
Ms Ghosh: Privatised in that it
is no longer part of government.
Q115 Joan Walley: But it is providing
a contracted-out government service.
Mr Smith: No, that is included,
absolutely included.
Q116 Joan Walley: I still cannot
quite see how there can be the tight oversight of the government
estate when, because of the contractual arrangements, it is no
longer technically part of the government estate.
Ms Ghosh: Because it is built
into the contract, because you use the contract to drive through
the sustainability outcomes you want, and that is what has happened
in Trillium and in HMRC. That is how you do it.
Q117 Joan Walley: And you have the
means of being able to audit and follow that through?
Ms Ghosh: Yes.
Mr Smith: Yes, absolutely. The
ePIMS database, which is I would say one of the best pieces of
management information I have come across in my eight months in
government, has got 97% of all of the government properties, that
is audited for accuracy, and we are at about 90% where we are
happy with the audit of accuracy. There is very good management
information.
Sir Ian Andrews: There may be
some confusion over the QinetiQ position. QinetiQ is actually
a private company which is no longer part of defence or government.
We are a minority, so that is completely removed off the pitch.
That is why I could not answer your question earlier about whether
I knew the extent to which they continue with the trajectory.
Everything which is on the government estate and is used by government—
Ms Ghosh: Used by government,
that is the definition.
Sir Ian Andrews: —is captured
in this. PFIs take different forms. You cited Land Securities
Trillium and DWP, we have a huge PFI in defence—I referred
to it earlier—for rationalising, renewing accommodation
on Salisbury Plain in Aldershot Garrison. This is an £8 billion
value over 35 years, it is accommodation for 18,500 people, demolishing
400 buildings, building 365 new ones, it is the biggest BREEAM
project which has ever been attempted. It is achieving 97% of
demolition waste crushed and re-used on site. I mentioned solar
thermal water heating earlier, it won Building Magazine's
Sustainable Development of the Year award and the entire supply
chain is accredited to ISO 14000 standards. Different PFIs have
different performances across the estate. If you look at the MoD
main building, which is a PFI, the building is not owned by us
over the period of the PFI but we are working with the PFI provider
to look at ways in which we can improve the sustainability, the
performance, of that building. So the shorthand PFI can take many
forms.
Q118 Chairman: So if we had DCLG
sat here and I was asking that question to your equivalent in
DCLG in terms of new school buildings or academies, or if we had
the Department of Health here, you could say with absolute certainty
that this is incorporated and presumably the Sustainable Development
Commission would be able to give the same verifiable answer?
Ms Ghosh: These targets apply
to the estate and buildings and operations of central government
departments, not local government which would be schools, or the
NHS.
Q119 Joan Walley: But it is still
government-funded, is it not?
Ms Ghosh: Many things are government-funded—NDPBs,
some of which are adhering to similar targets. This is just central
government departments and these targets apply to central government
departments, so any building which is occupied by a central government
department in any way, including my laboratories, is covered by
these targets. There are other mechanisms—and you would
need to ask Hugh Taylor and David Nicholson to talk in detail
about, for example the NHS—which departments are driving
through with their delivery bodies, like the NHS, like local government,
including my set of local area agreement targets, to get sustainability
out there in the wider public sector. This is central government.
21 See Ev 32. Back
22
Note by Witness: The freehold is, in fact, 43%, not 42%. Back
23
Note by Witness: The remaining 1% is serviced office accommodation. Back
| 
