Outcomes of the UN Rio+20 Earth Summit - Environmental Audit Committee Contents

3 Taking forward the Rio+20 commitments

26. The Rio+20 Summit in June 2012 produced a wide-ranging set of commitments, set out in The Future we want. This document was then reaffirmed at a UN General Assembly meeting in December 2012,[54] along with commitments to:

strengthen the role of the UN Economic & Social Council and UN Environment Programme, and create a new 'High Level Political Forum'[55] on sustainable development to replace the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (meeting from September 2013);
develop a 10-year sustainable consumption and production programme, with a trust fund to be established to pay for such initiatives;
establish an 'open working group' to develop Sustainable Development Goals,[56] to complement the High-level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (paragraph 36);
establish an inter-governmental committee to develop a financing strategy for work on sustainable development;[57] and
hold UN workshops on how to transfer 'clean technologies'.

Since then, some staging-points on the way to agreeing Post-2015 Development Goals have become clearer. In May 2013, the High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda reported (paragraph 36).[58] A UN event to consider the Millennium Development Goals will take place in September 2013, and the Sustainable Development Goals Open Working Group will report its initial conclusions in September 2014.

27. The UK will of course need to play a full and active role in taking these, and the wider Rio commitments, forward. From a domestic UK perspective, however, the Government now has a clear responsibility for action on four fronts which were singled out by the Deputy Prime Minister—the green economy, 'GDP-plus' measures of sustainable development and natural capital accounting, Sustainable Development Goals, and corporate sustainability reporting.[59] Such follow-up work is now being taken forward within what the Deputy Prime Minister called "departmental silos, which I do not interfere with, in a day-in day-out fashion".[60]

Green economy

28. In our report on the Preparations for the Rio+20 Summit we highlighted the need for a green economy to address issues of fairness, getting the price mechanisms right (incorporating environmental externalities in market values) and strengthening private sector participation in and incentives for sustainability. And we concluded in our subsequent report on the Green economy that the Government has more to do to "set out a clear definition of a green economy that addresses all three interdependent pillars of sustainable development, including 'social' considerations, well-being and environmental limits". The Government's focus on seeing the green economy as a means of 'green growth', we concluded, risked overlooking the importance of ensuring that development did not breach environmental 'planetary boundaries' and the need to fully consider the social pillar of sustainable development. We criticised the Government strategy for suggesting "things that businesses could, rather than should, do" and recommended that the Government set firm milestones for delivering aspects of a green economy.[61]

29. The Summit conclusions document positioned the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication, but fell some way short of identifying it as the only course to follow:

We affirm that there are different approaches, visions, models and tools available to each country, in accordance with its national circumstances and priorities, to achieve sustainable development in its three dimensions which is our overarching goal. In this regard, we consider ... the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication as one of the important tools available for achieving sustainable development and that it could provide options for policy making but should not be a rigid set of rules. We emphasise that it should contribute to eradicating poverty as well as sustained economic growth, enhancing social inclusion, improving human welfare and creating opportunities for employment and decent work for all, while maintaining the healthy functioning of the Earth's ecosystems.[62]

IIED argued that two factors, related to the green economy, contributed to a "failure" of the Summit:

First, the agenda was framed primarily to focus on the concept of the green economy and on the institutional framework for sustainable development. Both aroused a huge amount of suspicion among countries. One reason was that there was no authoritative baseline assessment on which discussion could then build, so it became intensely political, precisely because we were arguing over basic concepts. Inevitably, in a negotiation between diplomats, that becomes politicised and there are hidden agendas being sought even when they are not there. That was a key factor. Secondly—this is perhaps more positive—the Summit really saw the emergence of strong, articulate voices on this agenda from a diversity of Southern countries. ... Although in some instances that entailed saying "no" to the agenda, which was particularly the case from Latin American countries on the green economy and the commodification of nature, I think in the long run that is positive because there was an engagement that went beyond a knee-jerk pushback. It was saying, "We are interested in this agenda, but not in the terms in which we understand it is being presented to us". Those are two additional factors that I think contributed to the failure.[63]

30. The Deputy Prime Minister, shortly after the Summit, nevertheless saw the Rio conclusions on the green economy in a positive light:

... While the Rio declaration was not all that we would have wanted, this is the first time that a multilateral document expressing such strong support for the green economy has been agreed. That in itself is a major achievement recognising that, in the long term, greening our economies should not conflict with growing them.[64]

31. The commitments from Rio+20 challenged the UK, like all countries, to do more to promote a green economy, but effectively left it to individual countries to decide how strongly to embrace the principles of a green economy. While the Government says that it is committed to a green economy, it still has to demonstrate that commitment by producing an overarching strategy that will actively drive its delivery.

GDP-plus and natural capital

32. The Future We Want highlighted the need for new measures of progress on sustainable development to complement Gross Domestic Product—'GDP-plus'—and commissioned the UN Statistical Commission to take work forward, building on existing initiatives.[65] It identified a need for better data for decision-making:

... for guiding decision-making and implementation of sustainable development at all levels, ... we recognise that integrated social, economic, and environmental data and information, as well as effective analysis and assessment of implementation, is important to decision-making processes.[66]

This was an area that the Government was able to showcase at Rio. Christian Aid thought that the Government had been able to make a "positive input" on natural capital accounting, with the UK team at Rio seen to have been "actively engaged" on this area.[67] The Deputy Prime Minister reported soon after the Summit that:

Rio+20 recognised that we need to develop broader measures of progress to complement GDP in order to take account of the natural assets that will contribute to future prosperity—so-called GDP-plus. In the UK we have already committed to including natural capital within our system of national accounts by 2020. We worked hard at the summit to ensure that all nations present recognised the importance of broader measures of environmental and social wealth to complement GDP.[68]

And he elaborated further when he gave evidence to the Liaison Committee in February 2013:

... we will be one of the first developed economies in the world to [assess the consumption of natural capital in national accounts], and we got into the Rio summit conclusions a commitment that other countries would try to follow suit. We are leading the way on that, doing a lot of work at home which will hopefully set an example abroad.[69]

33. As we noted in our November 2012 report on Sustainable Development Indicators, the Government is developing measures of sustainable development on two fronts which predate the Rio+20 Summit. Defra is revising the Sustainable Development Indicators which, importantly, will reflect our recommendation from 2011 to account for emissions on a consumption (rather than production) basis.[70] Separately, the Office for National Statistics is running a 'Measuring National Well-being' initiative, following an announcement by the Prime Minister in November 2010 to develop measures of "national well-being and progress" to supplement existing measures of economic development such as GDP.[71] The UK is a leader in measuring progress on sustainable development through its initiatives on GDP-plus, Sustainable Development Indicators and the planned inclusion of natural capital in the National Accounts. These are important initiatives, but the test of their effectiveness will be in how such metrics are used to drive policy-making. We are currently undertaking an inquiry into how well-being measures could be used in decision-making.

Sustainable Development Goals

34. An agreement to develop Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was one of the main outcomes of the Summit.[72] The SDGs will help underpin and measure progress on sustainable development when the Millennium Development Goals expire in 2015. The Future we want stated that the SDGs will "address and incorporate in a balanced way all three dimensions of sustainable development and their inter-linkages". They should be "action-oriented, concise and easy to communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in nature and universally applicable to all countries", while "taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities".[73]

35. Ahead of the Summit, agreement on the process to develop SDGs was an important objective for the Government. As the Deputy Prime Minister reported soon after the Summit:

We agreed to set up the Sustainable Development Goals—a concept proposed by Colombia. I was one of the first to welcome this idea when President Santos visited London in November. The UK has been pushing hard to secure agreement ever since, and achieving it, even at this high outline level, was no mean feat. The UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, said that the SDGs should draw on the success of the Millennium Development Goals and should be an integral part of the post-2015 development framework. We would have liked to see specific themes agreed, focusing on ensuring that everyone can access enough food, energy and water, but getting such agreement was always going to be a huge undertaking. The UK Government will continue to keep up the pressure for rapid agreement. From now on, the process must be coherent and co-ordinated with the work of Secretary-General Ban's high-level panel on the post-2015 framework, which the Prime Minister will co-chair along with the leaders of Liberia and Indonesia.[74]

36. The Summit agreed a process to develop a set of SDGs through an inter-governmental 'open working-group' of 70 countries, including the UK. Its work was to be coordinated with that of the UN High-level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, which was co-chaired by the Prime Minister. The Deputy Prime Minister told the Liaison Committee that there was suspicion on the part of some countries about the two processes merging:

There was a strong feeling among some countries in the developing world, in particular, that they did not want the sustainable development goal initiative to somehow be swamped or subsumed in the Millennium Development Goal process. ... We must ensure that we do not let what is a fairly pronounced level of institutional rivalry creep into the process. Do not underestimate the resistance that still exists in some other countries, largely but not exclusively developing countries, which are suspicious about the SDG process being married to the post-2015 Millennium Development Goal process altogether.[75]

37. Nevertheless, the International Development Committee in their recent report on the Post-2015 Development Goals recommended that issues of sustainability be incorporated into the post-2015 framework, and noted that the close connection between poverty reduction and environmental sustainability supported the merging of the SDG process and the work of the High-level Panel.[76] The High-level Panel's May 2013 report set out 12 illustrative Goals for 2030, including one on 'managing natural resource assets sustainably'.[77] It recommended that in place of separate work on post-MDGs, climate change and the SDGs, "developing a single sustainable development agenda is critical".[78]

38. We concur with the International Development Committee's conclusion that the SDG and post-2015 Development goals processes should be carried out jointly, and welcome the recommendation from the High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, co-chaired by the Prime Minister, to integrate sustainable development targets with poverty eradication and climate change targets. It is vital that the Sustainable Development Goals introduce a shift from the developing country focus of the Millennium Development Goals towards a more universal approach which will also be relevant to developed countries. Goals also embracing developed countries should ensure that development does not jeopardise environmental 'planetary boundaries' by emphasising the importance of sustainable consumption and production. The High Level Panel's conclusion that Post-2015 Development Agenda targets should equally address developed countries is therefore welcome. As with other Rio+20 commitments, the UK's input on the SDGs (whether they are eventually separate from or combined with the Post-2015 Development Goals) needs to reflect a departmentally cross-cutting view of the sustainable development challenges we face.

39. The Government should take full advantage of the Prime Minister's position at the heart of the Post-2015 Development Agenda to provide international leadership in this area. It should set out its strategy for formulating the UK contribution to the design of the Sustainable Development Goals and Post-2015 Development Goals, and the roles of particular departments in that process. The Government should also engage businesses, NGOs, civil society groups and the wider public in developing a UK perspective on the desired design of those Goals, to form the basis for the Government's engagement with the European Union and the UN in the lead up to 2015.

40. In our recent report on the Government's Sustainable Development Indicators we recommended that once the UN Statistical Commission's work on well-being and the post-Rio draft Sustainable Development Goals take shape, the ONS and Defra should consider how a single framework to measure sustainable development and well-being might be produced for the UK, taking into account our agreed commitments.

Corporate sustainability reporting

41. In our report on Preparations for the Rio+20 Summit, we concluded that while many companies had identified that sustainable development was in their own interests, others needed to be incentivised to fully address the environmental and social aspects of sustainable development, and we recommended that the Government should push for Rio+20 to agree a mandatory regime for sustainability reporting.[79] Corporate sustainability reporting featured in the Rio conclusions document, though as an optional strategy for companies rather than as a mandatory requirement that some had hoped for:

We acknowledge the importance of corporate sustainability reporting and encourage companies, where appropriate, especially publicly listed and large companies, to consider integrating sustainability information into their reporting cycle. We encourage industry, interested governments as well as relevant stakeholders with the support of the UN system, as appropriate, to develop models for best practice and facilitate action for the integration of sustainability reporting, taking into account the experiences of already existing frameworks, and paying particular attention to the needs of developing countries, including for capacity building.[80]

The May 2013 report from the High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda also recommended corporate sustainability reporting:

A further aspect of accountability and information is how government and businesses account for their impact on sustainable development. Only a few progressive, large businesses try to account for their social and environmental footprint. The Panel proposes that, in future—at latest by 2030—all large businesses should be reporting on their environmental and social impact, or explain why if they are not doing so.[81]

42. While at Rio, the Deputy Prime Minister announced the Government's decision to require companies listed on the London Stock Exchange to report annually on their greenhouse gas emissions. He reported soon after the Summit that:

At Rio, national governments recognised the importance of working alongside businesses. Thanks in no small part to the leadership of UK firms, Rio recognised the role of corporate sustainability reporting to their shareholders and to prospective investors—something that would have been inconceivable even a year ago. I also announced in Rio that we will be the first country anywhere to mandate large companies to report on their greenhouse gas emissions. A growing number of companies and investors are realising that their own success is directly linked to sustainable, green growth. We hope that the call from all nations for businesses to report their sustainability performance will usher in a new era of transparency and consistency in the global business community.[82]

43. Section 85 of the Climate Change Act 2008 required the Environment Secretary by 6 April 2012 to make regulations[83] requiring the directors' report in a company's annual accounts to contain information about greenhouse gas emissions from activities for which the company is responsible, or else lay before Parliament a report explaining why no such regulations would be made. Before the Summit, in March 2012, Defra deferred its decision on whether to introduce mandatory reporting for the private sector, and instead laid a report setting out its reasons, stating that ministers were still considering responses to a 2011 public consultation.[84] The Deputy Prime Minister told the Liaison Committee in February 2013 that:

This is a big, new step so it took us some time to work that through; to allay some of the doubts about the knock-on effects of whether that would create undue burdens on business ... Again, we have an echo of that reflected in the Rio conclusions, and I hope that what we do here at home gets copied abroad.[85]

44. Defra's proposal envisages companies reporting their direct emissions (i.e. from their operations, transport, manufacturing processes and purchase of electricity),[86] although the methodology for calculating emissions is not prescribed. Companies will have to set out their emissions also in terms of an 'intensity ratio' (based on financial or activity metrics), but again how this is formulated will be left to companies' discretion.[87] Ministers suggested to us in March 2013 that the emissions data would be audited,[88] but they subsequently confirmed that the proposals do not entail introducing a statutory requirement for the emissions data to be independently verified.[89]

45. Carbon Tracker favoured a wider interpretation of company emissions, to include indirect emissions[90]—the emissions implicit in the coal, oil and gas that energy companies use to produce energy—and even the potential emissions implicit in such companies' untapped reserves of coal, oil and gas.[91] Owen Paterson MP, the current Environment Secretary of State, thought such a reporting requirement would be less definable and auditable, and would be "a step too far".[92] Oliver Letwin MP, Minister for Government Policy, saw the greater transparency built into the proposals "nudg[ing] them in the right direction without creating vast new bureaucracies".[93]

46. Separately, the Government had already introduced requirements for sustainability reporting by government departments for 2011-12 onwards, which covered use of water and energy and procurement practices, as well as emissions. We examine progress on such sustainability reporting in Government in our separate complementary report on embedding sustainable development.[94]

47. We welcome the Government's decision to introduce mandatory emissions reporting for large UK-listed companies. Rio+20 challenged countries to go further, however, to introduce 'sustainability reporting' which would include a wider set of information in companies' annual accounts. The information already required to be included in Government departments' reports demonstrates what might be possible. The Government should examine the scope for introducing mandatory sustainability reporting for the private sector, going beyond the current emissions reporting requirement, along the lines already applied to its own departments.

Other commitments

48. The Rio conclusions document included 26 thematic and cross-sectoral issues where further action is needed, including: poverty eradication, food security, nutrition and sustainable agriculture, water and sanitation, energy, sustainable transport, sustainable cities and human settlements, health and population, oceans and seas and marine biodiversity, climate change, biodiversity, forests, sustainable consumption and production, and education. These could all benefit from the UK Government's active participation. We have, nevertheless, identified three areas—which we discuss below—where recent policy development offers a particular opportunity for the Government to demonstrate its commitment to the Rio agenda more immediately: in education for sustainable development, in eliminating fossil fuel subsidies and in supporting sustainable development through the aid programme.

49. The Rio conclusions document also included a re-commitment to the 1992 Rio Principles, including the 'precautionary principle', which remain as important today as twenty years ago. Our recent report on Pollinators and pesticides, which recommended a moratorium on the use of neonicitinoid chemicals on particular crops, was founded on the application of the precautionary principle.

EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

50. The Rio+20 conclusions document included a clear commitment to build sustainable development into education:

We recognise that the younger generations are the custodians of the future, as well as the need for better quality and access to education beyond the primary level. We therefore resolve to improve the capacity of our education systems to prepare people to pursue sustainable development, including through enhanced teacher training, the development of curricula around sustainability, the development of training programmes that prepare students for careers in fields related to sustainability, and more effective use of information and communication technologies to enhance learning outcomes. We call for enhanced cooperation among schools, communities and authorities in efforts to promote access to quality education at all levels.[95]

...

We resolve to promote Education for Sustainable Development and to integrate sustainable development more actively into education beyond the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014).[96]

51. Our predecessor Committee examined this area in 2003[97] and 2005,[98] focussing on the profile of sustainable development in the school curriculum. Their 2005 report criticised the fact that the then recent national curriculum review had not included education for sustainable development despite an earlier official working group having identified it as a key requirement. The Government is now in the process of setting a new national curriculum. It has received input from an expert panel which recommended that the school curriculum should contribute strongly to environmental stewardship, and that in addition to four existing 'Aims' of the school curriculum (around economic, cultural, social and personal education) a fifth should be added: "To promote understanding of sustainability in the stewardship of resources locally, nationally and globally".[99] And the Environmental Association for Universities and Colleges (EAUC) has discussed how sustainable development should be taken toward in those education sectors.

52. A Government submission to an EAUC education conference in November 2012 suggested, however, that explicitly adding sustainability requirements would be contrary to its current approach to education reform:

The Government is fully committed to sustainable development and the importance of preparing young people for the future. Our approach to reform is based on the belief that schools perform better when they take responsibility for their own improvement. We want schools to make their own judgments on how sustainable development should be reflected in their ethos, day to day operations and through education for sustainable development. Those judgments should be based on sound knowledge and local needs… [100]

And when the Government published for consultation[101] its proposals for a draft framework for a new national curriculum for primary and secondary schools in February 2013,[102] it stated simply that the aim of the curriculum was to "provide pupils with an introduction to the core knowledge that they need to be educated citizens. It introduces pupils to the best that has been thought and said; and helps engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement."[103]

53. The draft curriculum framework applies only to mainstream schools, not to academies or free schools. The framework outlined programmes of study for the 'core subjects' of English, maths and science, as well for nine 'foundation subjects'. These include 'citizenship', which in "prepar[ing] pupils to take their place in society as responsible citizens" could have provided a platform for study of sustainable development issues. Instead, however, it deals only with democracy, government structures, the rule of law, volunteering and "providing [pupils] with the skills and knowledge to manage their money well and make sound financial decisions".[104]

54. The curriculum leaves individual schools able to formulate their own learning programmes which could include sustainable development. Academies and free schools will have even greater latitude to make their own learning plans. On the other hand, all schools are able to set themselves up as 'sustainable schools' which, as the Department for Education notes, "engage young people in their learning, thereby improving motivation and behaviour and also promote healthy school environments and lifestyles".[105]

55. Education for sustainable development is vital in developing countries faced with the effects of climate change and natural resource constraints. But it is also important that here in the UK future generations, including future leaders, fully understand the necessity of sustainable development, to put us on a sustainable footing and to provide the skills needed for a green economy. That requires a foundation of education and training that reflects an understanding of sustainable development at all stages, from primary schools through to apprentice colleges and universities. The proposed new national curriculum allows schools to set their own priorities for study, and we hope that all schools will wish to develop sustainable development learning. The Government should remind schools of the scope for addressing sustainable development in their learning plans and encourage them to set themselves up as 'sustainable schools' to promote such learning through the practical activities that that entails. The Government should also encourage schools to impart an understanding of the UN and other international bodies that are charged with setting out a sustainable development path.

ELIMINATING HARMFUL FOSSIL FUEL SUBSIDIES

56. The Rio+20 conclusions included a commitment to eliminate harmful fossil fuel subsidies:

Countries reaffirm the commitments they have made to phase out harmful and inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption and undermine sustainable development. We invite others to consider rationalising inefficient fossil fuel subsidies by removing market distortions, including restructuring taxation and phasing out harmful subsidies, where they exist, to reflect their environmental impacts ... [106]

57. This particular Rio commitment is an issue in the UK because of the ongoing development of energy policy, along with the prospect of a Government review of the Fourth Carbon Budget commitment in 2014.[107] There is of course a wider issue about the subsidies that should or should not be available for different types of energy generation as we seek to balance meeting our future energy needs and delivering our emissions reduction obligations. In our recent report on Autumn Statement 2012, we called on the Government to set out how it would implement this Rio commitment in the UK, in view of North Sea tax allowances announced during 2012 which might be regarded as subsidies.[108] We recently began an inquiry on energy subsidies which will examine the extent to which subsidies can be defined as 'harmful', the extent to which environmental cost 'externalities' are reflected in prices, and whether the Government has plans for meeting the Rio commitment to elimination harmful subsidies.

SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE AID PROGRAMME

58. The Rio+20 conclusions document recognised "the crucial importance of enhancing financial support from all sources for sustainable development for all countries, in particular developing countries".[109] Specifically, it noted the role of "international cooperation in the transfer of environmentally sound technologies",[110] the importance of "international cooperation to promote investment in science, innovation, and technology for sustainable development"[111] and "enhanced capacity building",[112] as well as the mobilisation of funding "to support nationally appropriate mitigation actions" and "adaptation measures" for climate change.[113] An intergovernmental committee would develop a framework for sustainable development by 2014.[114] In addition, Rio+20 recognised that "the fulfilment of all Official Development Assistance commitments is crucial", including the commitments by many developed countries to achieve the target of providing 0.7% of Gross National Income for ODA to developing countries by 2015.[115]

59. In our June 2011 report on the Impact of UK overseas aid, we examined how well DfID designed and assessed its aid programmes to ensure that they helped to address climate change and protect the environment.[116] In response to one of our recommendations, DfID published an 'environmental strategy' in June 2012 to shape its aid programme.[117] The Government should revisit its Aid Environment Strategy in light of the Rio+20 commitments. It should set out a commitment to play a full role in developing new sources of international sustainable development finance, and build in an explicit objective of promoting 'GDP-plus' metrics and natural capital accounting (paragraph 32) in aid-recipient countries, as well as private sector incentives to support a green economy.

A new commitment to sustainable development

60. On returning from the Rio+20 Summit, the Deputy Prime Minister spoke in terms of a reinvigorated drive for sustainable development:

Although Rio+20 did not go as far as we would have liked, it revived a global commitment to an agenda that has come gravely under threat. Progress was made in the areas where progress needed to be made. The declaration agreed by over 190 countries[118] should not be seen as the upper end of our ambition; it should be our baseline and we should all strive to surpass its expectation. We must build on the steps that were taken to reinvigorate the drive for sustainable development and lasting growth.

... We will remain committed to working with our partners and will be ambitious for the future. The summit is over but the work continues, and the UK will continue to lead from the front.[119]

61. In some parts of Government, however, there are signs of a less than fulsome commitment to sustainable development, at least in terms of domestic UK policy. As we have previously reported, while the Government needs to strengthen its commitment to a green economy, the Treasury appears to view the environment as a block to economic development. We noted in our reports on the green economy[120] and Autumn Statement 2012[121] that the Chancellor has made statements which appear to signal that the Treasury sees environmental and economic policies as competing rather than complementary. The Government is failing to provide for industry the environmental and energy policy certainty it needs to make investments, and has sometimes sent mixed signals.[122]

62. In January 2013, in a speech on a possible future referendum on the UK's relationship with Europe, the Prime Minister singled out the environment as an area where regulation need not be applied uniformly:

Let us not be misled by the fallacy that a deep and workable single market requires everything to be harmonised, to hanker after some unattainable and infinitely level playing field. Countries are different. They make different choices. We cannot harmonise everything. For example, it is neither right nor necessary to claim that the integrity of the single market, or full membership of the European Union requires the working hours of British hospital doctors to be set in Brussels irrespective of the views of British parliamentarians and practitioners. In the same way we need to examine whether the balance is right in so many areas where the European Union has legislated including on the environment, social affairs and crime. Nothing should be off the table.[123]

The Prime Minister may not envisage less stringent environmental regulation in a renegotiated relationship with the EU, but until that is clarified there will inevitably be a doubt about the Government's commitment to protecting the environment.

63. Such uncertainty could be countered by producing a new sustainable development strategy, to update the now eight years old Securing the future[124] and demonstrate the Government's unambiguous commitment to UK development which is sustainable in terms of the environment as well as the economy. We called for such a new strategy in our 2011 report on embedding sustainable development[125] but instead the Government produced a short 'Vision for sustainable development' in February 2011.[126] Owen Paterson told us in March 2013 that he did not see a need for a new Sustainable Development Strategy:

I think we have a very clear position on where we are going, and I think these reports are the first ones to show significant progress. I think the discussion we have had for the last hour and a half or so shows there are all sorts of ways we can improve but we are on the right course. I am not sure we need to tear the whole thing up and make another great change and enlist a whole lot more people, I think we have to make this work.[127]

64. The Government is in a pivotal position to make progress on the globally-focussed commitments flowing from the Rio+20 Summit, by virtue of the Prime Minister's co-chairmanship of the UN Secretary General's High Level Panel on post-2015 development and as one of the working group countries developing the Sustainable Development Goals (paragraph 36). Consistent and effective action is also needed in the UK, but recent policy development suggests that the Government has not resolved its attitude and approach to sustainable development at home.

The results of Rio+20 should be regarded by the Government as a starting point for sustainable development in policy-making within the UK, as much as for global initiatives. The Government should update the 2005 Sustainable Development Strategy, informed by the commitments and recommendations of Rio+20 as well as including targets linked to the Sustainable Development Indicators (paragraph 33). In the meantime, the Government should establish forums for engaging businesses, civil society, educators and the wider public in exploring the Rio+20 commitments for the UK and how the Government could take those forward. And the Government needs to set out a plan to bring its influence, and that of parliamentarians across Europe (including through the regular meetings of environmental committee members under the rotating EU presidency), to bear on the Rio commitments at the key staging-points (paragraph 26) towards agreeing the Post-2015 Development Goals.

54 UN General Assembly resolution, December 2012, 61^st meeting, which passed draft resolution: Implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/ga11332.doc.htm). Back

55 A 'high level political forum' was envisaged in The Future We Want, op cit, paras 84-86 Back

56 SDGs were covered in paras 245-251 of The Future We Want, op cit. Back

57 Covered in paras 255-257 of The Future We Want, op cit,. Back

58 A New Global Partnership: Eradicate poverty and transform economies through sustainable development, 30 May 2013 (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/we-can-end-global-poverty-by-2030-united-nations-report). Back

59 HC Deb, 26 June 2012, col 161 Back

60 Uncorrected oral evidence before the Liaison Committee, 5 February 2013, HC 958-i, Q 8 Back

61 A Green Economy, HC 1025, op cit Back

62 The Future We Want, op cit, para 56 Back

63 Q 48 Back

64 HC Deb, 26 June 2012, col 161 Back

65 The Future We Want, op cit, para 38 Back