Meeting with the deputy prime minister : vehicle emissions : government response / Select Committee on Science and Technology.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee.
Date:
1997
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Meeting with the deputy prime minister : vehicle emissions : government response / Select Committee on Science and Technology. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    17/36 page 9
    Chairman 31. Deputy Prime Minister, we were interested to see the establishment of the Environmental Audit Committee as a House of Commons Committee and pleased to see that it will be able to share evidence and hold joint meetings with other committees of the Commons and the Lords, which we assume will include this Committee, so we look forward to a fruitful interaction with that Committee on occasions. I wonder if you would like to tell us whether you see that Committee as having a positive role across government in, for example, the development of energy efficient alternatives? (Mr Prescott) Yes, my Lord. I confirm right away that of course it will be able to share evidence, we would like it to do so, and work with your Lordships in this House. If I can say one or two words about our approach to it. We thought it was important that environmental issues were given a proper airing and that government should be judged as much on their delivery of policies as on the rhetoric and promises. We thought that perhaps to encourage a much tougher attitude for public debate and judgment on government we might set up and establish what we say is a government-wide Environmental Audit Committee. The government can set its targets, as we have done with the 20 per cent reduction in CO2, and also I think it is important then that we should be judged on that promise and see just how effective we are about implementing it. After all, once that target is set for something like 2010, I think in the intervening years it is important to see if you are on target to actually achieve what you have said you want to achieve. We thought there were two or three ways that we wish government to be examined in this process on environmental issues. One, of course, is the establishment of the Cabinet Committee which indeed the previous administration had. We would like to think that ours is a more powerful one, it has given the environment greater importance, but I leave that for the possibility of the charge of rhetoric; it is there. The Cabinet Committee will be working with all the departments to make sure that many of the policies now do take into account environmental issues at the early stages of their proposals and their ideas. The second point, therefore, was to establish an Environmental Committee in the House, which we already have. The Environment and Transport Select Committee will be able to judge the sorts of things we are doing, and indeed to assist in that process we thought it was important to bring the two Departments of Environment and _ Transport together, which we have done. I think that is going to make an important difference, particularly in regard to integrated transport and environment matters because for the first time we have these two Departments of State being brought together whereas quite frankly they did not appear to work together too often in the past. When you look at planning and look at transport and environmental issues it is important that one department has overall surveillance and implementation of that policy. The Environmental Audit Committee was something that we envisaged very much like the Public Expenditure Committee, where you have the practice of the chairman being selected from the Opposition Party, which has now been just been appointed, I think it met for the first time on 25 November and John Horam is now appointed as its Chairman. It is to scrutinise the policies and actions for sustainable development and the environment government-wide. I think I said at the time he was appointed that I would like it to be a terrier to bite our ankles, and I can see it playing that role, its job is to keep us in check and see exactly what we are doing. The Committee’s remit is to scrutinise how far the policies and programmes of the government departments, and indeed the non-departmental public bodies which are quite important, contribute to environmental protection and sustainable development and to audit their performance. They are not like the Environment and Transport Committee, they are like the Public Expenditure Audit Committee. They have a specific job to do, they can call for all papers, and I think that they will play a very valuable part in making sure that not only are the government’s actions up to scratch in achieving the environmental targets they have set for themselves but to encourage very effective public debate in the way that the Public Accounts Committee have been able to do in the areas of the economy and industry. 32. Do you think that this Committee will have in mind the argument about gain and pain that you advanced yourself this afternoon? (Mr Prescott) Yes, I am sure they will because often it is the case that people think the application of policies is more about pain. I think if they can have a more balanced debate about this, and I am thinking of the Kyoto Agreement, that should now begin to enable us to look at what gains we can get from this opportunity. Committees like this will be able to measure in a way like the Public Accounts Committee does and make a very serious contribution to the debate in the necessary changes that undoubtedly will come, once we have set this framework of commitment to targets. Lord Flowers 33. Deputy Prime Minister, this is a potentially very important development indeed but may I ask whether the Committee will be expected to form not just a particular view about particular proposals or activities, the effect of the steel industry on the environment or something like that, but will also be expected to take an overall view which tries to balance the pluses and minuses of various activities and come to a view about what is the best practicable environmental option overall? (Mr Prescott) Yes, I think it should do. I hope it will do but that is for the members of the Committee itself. One important job that it can do from my point of view is that when we say that all legislation will now take into account the environmental consequences of its action they will be able to examine each of the sections of my department and also every other government department as to how they are achieving those environmental objectives. To get the best assessment they need to have an overall objective to be judging them against. That may be controversial, it may be a different one from the one the government is pursuing. If the government says that it wants to achieve a target, if I can go back to the Kyoto one, and looking and examining that, they can make a judgment whether
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3