Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140-159)
JOAN RUDDOCK
MP AND MR
MARTIN BRASHER
15 JULY 2008
Q140 Joan Walley: Is not one of the
issues that there is not really a lot of expertise available across
local authorities? I know, for example, in my own local authority
area, until certainly last month there was no ecological support
or expertise actually available to influence all the different
aspects of delivery of services. So how are you going to address
that? How are you going to make sure that that expertise is available
at the local level, for not just the authorities which are choosing
to adopt these agreements but the ones which have not even got
it on their radar screens?
Joan Ruddock: We do not dictate
to local authorities how they deal with the challenges that we
present to them; it is up to them to recognise their need for
acquiring expertise and, indeed, to find that expertise. I am
not sufficiently informed to know whether there is a shortage
in the country. If by any chance there is, then I hope very much
that young people going to university today are going to try and
do such work, because not only is it vital work and valuable work
but, increasingly, it is going to be needed. I think there are
career opportunities there.
Q141 Joan Walley: Should that not
be something for Defra, maybe, linking up with education and looking
at professional qualification courses as well, because at a future
time of adaptation to climate change we are going to need this
specialist advice?
Joan Ruddock: In terms of adaptation,
I have a series of bilateral meetings around government and will
be systematically meeting with the adaptation minister who has
been appointed in every department. I have not yet had my education
meeting but I am very happy to make this one of the points because
I think it is entirely valid that we ought to be looking to see
that we are producing a workforce sufficiently skilled to tackle
both our environmental needs and adaptation, in particular.
Q142 Joan Walley: Finally, just so
that we know what diversity there is, are there any plans from
Defra to map across the country as a whole what is currently there?
At the moment, obviously, concentration is just on protected habitats,
but are there any plans to do a mapping exercise right the way
across the country?
Joan Ruddock: I am going to receive
some advice on that in a moment. "Is Defra going to do something?",
the answer is, of course, that so much of the work that is done
on our priority species and habitats is actually done by volunteers.
It is a brilliant partnership that we have. We have a biodiversity
network of organisations that includes so many of the NGOs that
provide volunteers, and so much of the work is actually done is
by volunteers. For example, over 500 non governmental experts,
many working on a voluntary basis, contributed to the recent review
of the UKBAP priority species and habitat, which lead to the publication
last year of an updated priority list. I just want to pay tribute
to the fact that in this country we have a great culture of naturalists
and people who are interested, and they do huge amounts of work.
The countryside survey, apparently, is currently engaged—I
am going to ask Martin Brasher to explain what mapping is going
on.
Mr Brasher: Just to explain that
there is a process of countryside survey which is done regularly
which does not actually provide a map but it is a national collection
of information. I think I am right in saying we are going out
to renew that this autumn—the further countryside survey
will be started—and that will provide the kind of information,
not necessarily as a map, about what has changed in the countryside
since the previous countryside survey. Of course, also, we would
go to our agencies, Natural England and the Environment Agency,
and so on, for information if we needed that.
Q143 Joan Walley: We were wondering
whether or not satellite information could help, and whether or
not that contributes to computer modelling, so that we could have
that information that would help with that future landscape strategy.
Any views on that?
Mr Brasher: I was reaching for
this document which came out last week Wetlands Vision,
which certainly used that sort of information to show changes
over time. I am sure there is a place for that but things which
come to mind for me—
Q144 Joan Walley: Perhaps you would
like to write to us.[18]
Mr Brasher: We could have a look
at that.
Joan Ruddock: If there is anything
else that we can tell you we will be very happy to write to you
on that.[19]
I should just say that UKCIP, the climate impacts team, are producing
their probabilistic scenarios, for now until the end of the century,
in November, and they will actually produce maps which have got
down to 25-kilometre squares in which they will be telling us
not an absolute prediction but the probability is and what the
range might be of climate change down to that level, and that,
clearly, is going to be incredibly important to people working
in this field.
Q145 Martin Horwood: I am very interested
in some of the things you have just been saying, which sounded
like positive developments, but can we just explore how much these
have been joined up with other bits of government? The Sub-National
Review is obviously part of the framework for the new developing
regional tier of government, and it is giving planning controls,
essentially, to the RDAs (Regional Development Agencies) which,
historically, do not really have a very good record on environmental
issues other than putting environmental issues high up on their
agenda, partly because their original raison d'etre was
economic development. The Sub-National Review seems to have a
strong focus, really, on the basis of economic growth and setting
performance for the RDAs on the basis of economic growth. Are
you confident that biodiversity is going to be adequately protected
at that level?
Joan Ruddock: I am confident that
we have had sufficient input and a degree of influence over what
is happening. It is true that the history is one of economic thrust,
and that is entirely understandable, and that there has been a
desire in government to increase the power of the regions in terms
of developing economies. The implementation of the Sub-National
Review does not have an emphasis on economic growth to the exclusion
of all other considerations. We have made it clear, and the consultation
document states, that regional strategies will be underpinned
by sustainable development principles, and it is on that that
we would rest our expectations of how biodiversity considerations
are built in. They will also require a sustainability appraisal,
and once the sustainability appraisal is done that is bound to
take account—
Q146 Martin Horwood: That is quite
reactive, though, is it not, Minister? Some of the important work
you have been talking about, like the countryside surveys—are
those being fed into regional spatial strategies?
Joan Ruddock: I do not know if
we have an answer to that.
Mr Brasher: No.
Joan Ruddock: If they are not
then it would be entirely reasonable to do so.
Q147 Martin Horwood: The one I am
most familiar with is the South West regional spatial strategy
which is being finalised this year (in fact, this summer), and
as far as I know that is full of maps for housing; it has no maps
for biodiversity and no spatial planning for biodiversity at all.
Mr Brasher: The countryside survey
is a long-term exercise and I believe it can take three years
in order to be carried out.
Q148 Martin Horwood: Is it going
to be too late for the regional spatial strategy?
Joan Ruddock: There is bound to
be comparable material that is already available. Let us look
at it. I can see no reason why, if we have got (I am not in a
position to say whether we have or we have not) material that
ought to be fed into that, then we can make it our business to
feed it in.
Q149 Martin Horwood: What about the
important stuff you were talking about a minute ago about valuing
ecosystem services? Is that being fed into regional climate strategies?
Joan Ruddock: I have to say to
you that officials are working across government all of the time.
In terms of our PSA delivery, that is our prime target for the
way in which all of government works, which is clearly to deliver
and protect our natural environment. That work goes on through
a board, and that board has other government departments sitting
on it, chaired by Defra. So all of the senior civil servants who
then end up working in other areas are getting these messages
and are constantly being told that this is what is expected of
government departments in terms of delivery. So I cannot tell
you whether particular documents are being exchanged at any point
or between any departments, but what I can tell you is that we
have no doubt that other government departments are aware of what
is required of them, and the fact that this needs to filter down
to all levels. As I said, we are going to review what has happened
in terms of the NERC duty and, of course, in the case of the Sub-National
Review we are dealing with something which is new, but they are,
again, under a duty to help to contribute to the PSA 28, which
is the healthy natural environment PSA that Defra leads on.
Q150 Martin Horwood: You have had
a bilateral meeting with DCLG, have you not? You talked about
having bilateral meetings with other departments.
Joan Ruddock: Indeed I have and
we did discuss these things.
Q151 Martin Horwood: Did you discuss
ecosystem services and spatial planning for biodiversity?
Joan Ruddock: We had a broad-ranging
discussion which obviously was a Defra perspective on DCLG's plans.
I would not want to reveal more than that.
Q152 Martin Horwood: The trouble
is that many of these regional economic and spatial strategies
are being finalised now and they are setting an agenda for twenty
years hence. If these things have not been incorporated, if they
have not been part of the planning process, are you saying that
DCLG will now need to go back and tell its regional agencies to
revise those strategies?
Joan Ruddock: When people start
to put something on the ground, whether it is pouring concrete
or building bricks, they have to have in mind all these considerations.
There are tests in place. There is Planning Policy Statement 9
which they have to have regard to. If you have found deficiencies
in documents or you do find deficiencies in documents, you may
well be right. All I am saying is that we know what is expected
of other government departments and they know what they are expected
to do. We are not in a perfect situation. We are not in a situation
where this has been at the heart of government for so long that
every single person understands it and every document has the
right words in it. I am acknowledging there could be imperfections
in lots of places, in lots of documents, even in strategies, but
at the end of the day things have been put in place and we will
have to see in practice whether they turn out to be doing things
in the wrong way or whether indeed they turn out to do things
that are consistent with our PSA target.
Q153 Martin Horwood: You suggested
in your memo to us[20]
that the planning system was currently failing to ensure that
adequate biodiversity compensation measures were being taken because
you talked about lots of ways in which they could be improved.
Joan Ruddock: They can.
Q154 Martin Horwood: Why do you think
it is happening at the moment? Why do you think adequate biodiversity
compensation measures are not being taken at the moment?
Joan Ruddock: I think it is because
we are dealing with areas of new science and endeavour that people
who have run government departments, been in government departments,
been in local government, been planners and been developers have
not had regard to in the past. They have not understood any of
these things. They do not just come to them as an inspiration.
We need to do the work. Defra has been doing the work. We have
agreed the PSA around government. We have put in place Planning
Policy Statement 9. We have got the NERC duty. All I can tell
you is how much we have done. This is all work that has been done
over a very, very few recent years. To expect that everybody has
got the message and everybody is behaving appropriately would
be unrealistic.
Q155 Martin Horwood: It is clear
that you are doing important work, but I can tell you that there
is at least one regional spatial strategy with which I am familiar
in which essentially all the mapping is of maps of where houses
are going to be built and nothing else, there is no landscape
or biodiversity element to it whatsoever.
Joan Ruddock: I have heard what
you said. Let me give you the assurance that I will personally
look into this issue and have a discussion with the regional minister
responsible and we will see. We can make this a mini test of how
we are working. What I hope to find is that all the officials
have all been saying the right things and talking to each other,
but I will take it up with the minister.
Mr Brasher: There are at least
three elements in this. One is that these duties and so on are
in place and that is progress from five or 10 years ago. Secondly,
the structures that the minister referred to are relatively new.
PSA28 is relatively new and the structures for that are in place
and that is collaborative working which I personally certainly
see as helpful. There have been countryside surveys in the past
and there is another one just about to be launched. You referred
to the "Introductory Guide to Valuing Ecosystem Services"
and that is an area which is taking off in terms of people having
a keen interest in it internationally as well as domestically
and it is something that the UK is strongly behind.
Q156 Martin Horwood: If the RDAs
are being given essentially economic performance targets, are
they interested in it?
Joan Ruddock: That is the whole
point about actually trying to produce some economic analysis
of the value of ecosystems. Whereas we can endeavour to give people
an understanding of the value of biodiversity and so on and so
forth, being able to demonstrate that it has an economic value
arguably may make more of an impact on some of the people who
we are trying to give messages to. That is a piece of work that
we think is particularly useful.
Q157 Martin Horwood: Would your hope
and your expectation be that these kinds of regional strategies
all over the country will be revised in the light of your work?
Joan Ruddock: I am not suggesting
they need to be revised. I am simply saying that when they are
put into practice they have to take account of all the things
that I have just described.
Q158 Martin Horwood: I would like
to ask you about the Community Infrastructure Levy. There has
been a suggestion made by some of our witnesses that a guaranteed
percentage of that should go to green infrastructure to ensure
that that is something that is delivered on because otherwise
the community benefits could be in transport and the built environment
and so on. Would you support having 10% of the levy ring-fenced
for green infrastructure?
Joan Ruddock: We would not at
the moment. These decisions are going to be taken locally, not
by central government. What Defra did was to ensure that the Community
Infrastructure Levy could actually be used for biodiversity gain
or for conservation and that was very important. That is another
example of why it is new thinking, because in the past if you
got a Section 106 it was going to be to build a community centre.
People always thought community gain was going to be a building.
Having moved it on to considerations of biodiversity, we think
that local authorities and particularly local people may well
want this to be a priority. The fact it can be used is the important
thing and we will obviously want to keep this monitored, see how
we go and then we could consider whether there was a need for
a minimum, but it is far too early for us to have made that stipulation
or tried to persuade other government departments that that should
be the case.
Q159 Mark Lazarowicz: I want to continue
on the theme of co-ordination across government. You have made
it clear to us that your Department has made it clear to other
departments what is expected of them, but the issue is how far
they do that. Some of the evidence we have had suggested that,
if anything, there has been something of a loss of focus on biodiversity
issues across government in recent times. Evidence that has been
put before us pointed to the conclusion there had been cuts in
the budget of Natural England. Apparently there is an inter-ministerial
group on biodiversity which has not met since your appointment
a year ago. Natural England has highlighted DCLG's failures on
brownfield biodiversity, minimising biodiversity impacts of new
developments, incorporating biodiversity into the sustainable
construction code, not delivering quality urban parks and green
spaces and so on. That is obviously quite critical evidence. How
can we really have confidence that the measures being put in place
are having the right impact so far? What do you say to the suggestion
that there has been a loss of focus on biodiversity recently rather
than an enhanced focus on that area?
Joan Ruddock: I certainly do not
think there has been a loss of focus on biodiversity. I would
say exactly the opposite is true, that there has been a very strong
focus on biodiversity and that we have reinvigorated the BAP process
in a number of ways over the past year. I think what tends to
happen is that when these things are absolutely new then clearly
they receive a lot of attention and so people are very, very aware
of what is going on and people think a great deal is being done
when something starts up. What I have found over the last year
is that when we have repeatedly had events, meetings and conferences,
this is the area where there is least comment in the media on
anything that we do. In fact, that particular wetlands report
that Martin was showing you did get some publicity but I think
it was very much from the point of view of the NGOs that were
involved rather than the fact that it was so heavily supported
by the government agencies at delivery. It is quite difficult
to get people to appreciate just how much is being done. Last
year there was a ministerial workshop with NGO partners on embedding
the ecosystem approach and streamlining bureaucracy. We published
the revised UK list of priority species and habitats in August
last year. We launched on behalf of the UK Biodiversity Partnership
"Conserving Biodiversity: The UK Approach" as a new
strategic framework, setting out our shared purpose in tackling
the loss and restoration of biodiversity in October last year.
We agreed through the UK Biodiversity Partnership Standing Committee
a forward process for action on the UK list of priority species
and habitats. Only last November we appointed Natural England
as our lead delivery body in England. Then we oversaw a process
to identify the key conservation actions needed for each of the
1,149 species on the UK list of priority species and habitats.
We published the list of habitats and species of principal importance
for conservation in May of this year. Natural England is currently
finalising a new framework for the delivery of priority habitats
and species in England. We have not been inactive. There is a
constant work scheme being undertaken and that is apart from all
the other things I have said and the work on adaptation. We believe
that we are doing a great deal. I know that people will always
point to what is not being done, but if you look at the progress
that we have made, we have had more species and habitats that
have improved as compared to those that have not. We have also
put in place many other things around government. I know that
there have been criticisms of the National Parks and the Areas
of Outstanding Natural Beauty. As a result of that I have asked
Natural England and the National Parks to re-examine the existing
National Park biodiversity action plans and to make sure that
they are delivering on their contribution to biodiversity. When
I looked up to see what they were doing there were many, many
things which were very positive, like the Chilterns, which have
been involved in working with partners on chalk grasslands and
Bowland, which has been restoring upland heathland. We can always
say there is much, much more to be done, but we are continually
active on every front as are our delivery bodies. As for the money
being spent, yes, Natural England has had a somewhat reduced budget,
but there is a massive amount of money, which means that the overall
budget is constantly increasing and will constantly increase because
we have got £2.9 billion which is in the agri-environment
schemes. If we are taking a landscape approach, which we are,
then we think putting money into the agri-environment schemes
is the best way forward and Natural England agrees with that.
18 See Ev 80. Back
19
See Ev 80. Back
20
See Ev 60. Back
| 
