Climate change and local, regional and devolved Government · 2008-07-30 · Mr Shahid Malik, MP ( Labour, Dewsbury ) Mrs Linda Riordan, MP (Labour, Halifax) ... has been significant

HC 225 Published on 28 July 2008

by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited

£23.00

House of Commons

Environmental Audit Committee

Climate change and local, regional and devolved Government

Eighth Report of Session 2007–08

Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence

Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 8 July 2008

The Environmental Audit Committee

The Environmental Audit Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to consider to what extent the policies and programmes of government departments and non-departmental public bodies contribute to environmental protection and sustainable development; to audit their performance against such targets as may be set for them by Her Majesty’s Ministers; and to report thereon to the House.

Current membership

Mr Tim Yeo, MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) (Chairman) Gregory Barker, MP (Conservative, Bexhill and Battle) Mr Martin Caton, MP (Labour, Gower) Mr Colin Challen, MP (Labour, Morley and Rothwell) Mr David Chaytor, MP (Labour, Bury North) Martin Horwood, MP (Liberal Democrat, Cheltenham) Mr Nick Hurd, MP (Conservative, Ruislip Northwood) Mark Lazarowicz, MP (Labour/Co-operative, Edinburgh North and Leith) Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger, MP (Conservative, Bridgewater) Mr Shahid Malik, MP (Labour, Dewsbury) Mrs Linda Riordan, MP (Labour, Halifax) Mr Graham Stuart, MP (Conservative, Beverley & Holderness) Jo Swinson, MP (Liberal Democrat, East Dunbartonshire) Dr Desmond Turner, MP (Labour, Brighton, Kempton) Joan Walley, MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent North) Mr Phil Woolas, MP (Labour, Oldham and Saddleworth [ex-officio]

Powers

The constitution and powers are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally Standing Order No. 152A. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.

Publication

The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at: www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/environmental_audit_committee.cfm. A list of Reports of the Committee from the present and prior Parliaments is at the back of this volume.

Committee staff

The current staff of the Committee are: Gordon Clarke (Clerk); Sara Howe (Second Clerk); Richard Douglas (Committee Specialist); Oliver Bennett (Committee Specialist); Susan Monaghan (Committee Assistant); Stella Kin (Secretary); Elizabeth Gardner (Sandwich Student); and Ray Kennedy (Sandwich Student)

Contacts

All correspondence should be addressed to The Clerk, Environmental Audit Committee, Committee Office, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general inquiries is: 020 7219 6150; the Committee’s e-mail address is: [email protected]

Climate change and local, regional and devolved government 1

Contents

Report Page

Summary 3

1 Introduction 5

2 The role of local, regional and devolved government 5 The local government response 8 Barriers to action 9

3 The policy and performance management frameworks 10 Policy and policy coherence 10 Local Government Performance Framework 13

Local Area Agreements and indicators for local government 13 Comprehensive Area Assessment 16 Targets 17

4 Putting climate change on the agenda 20 The Nottingham Declaration 20 Engaging political leaders and senior staff 22 Making it part of the decision making process 23 Powers 24

The case for a statutory duty 24 Using existing powers effectively 25

Building knowledge and skills 27 Improving regional co-ordination 29

Regional structures and strategies 29 Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration 31

Devolved administrations 32 Adaptation 33

5 Conclusion 35

Conclusions and recommendations 36

Formal Minutes 40

Witnesses 41

List of written evidence 41

List of unprinted evidence 42


Summary

Local, regional and devolved government all have distinctive roles to play in tackling climate change. A step change in the level of activity is needed at all levels and the Government has put in place a number of changes in the policy framework and performance management of local government that should help to bring this about. Having a coherent and co-ordinated approach to climate change policy from the centre will help, especially when balancing short-term economic pressures with longer-term questions about sustainable development. It is too early to say how effective the new performance management framework will be but the early indications are good. It will be vital to get the right targets in place to deliver the kind of action needed on both mitigation and adaptation.

The Nottingham Declaration, and its Scottish and Welsh equivalents, has been useful in raising awareness but more could be done to make sure that public commitments result in action. Spreading best practice and providing advice and guidance are also important. Making carbon impact assessments part of the decision making process could throw light on some of the issues around longer-term sustainability questions, particularly in relation to investment and planning decisions. The climate change agenda is a challenging one, especially for local authorities, and will depend on having people with the right skills and knowledge in place. Advice is available from a number of sources but the capacity of local authorities to respond is limited; the Government will need to think about how skills gaps are addressed and what support is needed.

A great deal of attention is being paid to efforts to reduce emissions; much less is paid to adaptation. Even if we are successful in reducing emissions we will face changes in our climate and much more needs to be done to prepare for these. The Government will bring forward a national framework on adaptation; it will need to ensure that greater attention is paid to adaptation at all levels of government in the UK.


1 Introduction 1. The UK is unlikely to meet its domestic targets for reducing carbon emissions without greater emphasis on the behaviours of individuals and communities.1 Defra has recognised that action by local, regional and devolved bodies will be crucial to the achievement of targets.2 Local authorities, regional government and devolved administrations are well placed to play a significant part in reducing emissions; they manage large estates, provide services and act as community leaders. We welcome the final report from the Local Government Association’s Commission on Climate Change, published in December 2007, which said that local government was uniquely placed to tackle climate change.3 It recognised that local government had a democratic mandate for action, close proximity to citizens and a strategic role in leading public, private and voluntary sector partners. Local, regional and devolved governments will also have a key part to play in ensuring that the UK adapts to a changing climate; even if efforts to reduce emissions are successful some climate change is inevitable. The Governance of Britain Green Paper said, ‘The devolution settlement across the United Kingdom reflects the Government’s wish to ensure that decision-making is done at the right level: whether national, regional or in the local community’.4 The key question, within the context of the devolutionary agenda that is being pursued, is whether the policy framework the Government has put in place will deliver the step change in action on climate change needed in local, regional and devolved government.

2. We launched our inquiry on 28 November 2007 to assess the Government’s efforts to create the conditions in local, regional and devolved government where measures to address the challenge of climate change can be effectively supported and rewarded; we are grateful to all those who contributed and have acknowledged them at the end of our Report. The evidence we received and our Report deal mainly with the areas where there has been significant change and thus focus to a great extent on local authorities in England. The general principles underpinning our recommendations are more widely applicable.

2 The role of local, regional and devolved government 3. It is clear that the different levels of government in the UK all have distinctive roles to play in driving forward action to reduce emissions, supporting the move towards a low-carbon economy and adapting to changes in climate. In this part of our report we look at the role of local, regional and devolved government, and in particular at the response of local government. We identify some barriers that inhibit effective action and look briefly at the relationship between central and local government in this policy area.

1 Ev 109

2 Ev 55

3 Final Report of the LGA Climate Change Commission, a climate of change, December 2007

4 Ministry of Justice, The Governance of Britain, CM 7170, July 2007

6 Climate change and local, regional and devolved government

4. While the UK Government remains responsible for Kyoto targets and the programmes to deliver it, many of the policies implementing the UK’s climate change strategy are devolved matters.5 Devolution in the UK is asymmetric; there are different powers devolved to the administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This inevitably means that each of the devolved administrations has a slightly different role to play with regard to climate change and a slightly different relationship with central Government. In England, regional government continues to evolve; through Government Offices in the regions certain administrative functions are decentralised and Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) were established in 1998. RDAs have a role in ensuring co-ordination of action on climate change across a region.6 It is only since 2006 that central Government has acknowledged the potential impact of local government.7 Local authorities can take action on their own estates but more importantly, they can help to lead and encourage work within the communities they serve.8 The part they play in leading and galvanising local partners and residents is probably more significant than their work to reduce their own emissions.9 In England, local authorities control significant expenditure; planned expenditure for 2006–07 was about £145bn, of which £110bn (76%) was provided by central Government.10

Figure 1: Local authorities can influence carbon emissions through their roles as estate managers, service providers and community leaders11

Role Examples of activities that can influence carbon emissions

Estate manager − Energy use − Procurement − Staff travel

Service provider − Management of social housing − Waste management − Local transport planning and infrastructure − Enforcing building regulations − Responsibility for the planning system − Responsibilities for schools and care homes

Community leader − Advice and information to local citizens − Advice and information to local businesses − Advice and information to other statutory

and non-statutory organisations

5. Local, regional and devolved government all have distinctive roles in relation to climate change. Each must show leadership in tackling it, showing within their own operations what can be achieved12 but also influencing the communities they lead, co-ordinating

5 Ev 55

6 Ev 55

7 Q104

8 Ev 56

9 Q104

10 NAO, Central Government Support for local authorities on climate change, Briefing for the EAC, April 2007

11 Based on NAO, Central Government Support for local authorities on climate change, Briefing for the EAC, April 2007

12 Ev 24


action and engaging with partners. There are important differences between bodies like local authorities, regional assemblies and devolved administrations, which have a democratic mandate and are ultimately accountable to their electorates, and bodies like Government Office and Regional Development Agencies, which have a key role to play in the delivery of Public Service Agreements and in championing action on climate change and bringing partners together. However, not all of the evidence presented to us showed a clearly defined role for local, regional and devolved government.13 It is vital that local, regional and devolved government have a clear understanding of their role in tackling climate change. We commend the work the Government has done in collaboration with the devolved administrations. We recognise that the Local Government Association’s Commission on Climate Change has helped to raise the profile of climate change and has made some important recommendations. However, central Government has a duty to co-ordinate how the different spheres of government in the UK interact and to integrate, within the context of devolution and localism, action on the issue of climate change.

6. The Department for Communities and Local Government and Defra have produced guidance jointly to help local authorities make the most of the new local government performance framework in taking forward work on climate change and sustainability.14 The Local Government Association’s Commission on Climate Change set out five major areas where councils could make real progress: adaptation to climate change, existing housing stock, planning, transport, and procurement.15 We were surprised that waste management did not feature in the list of priorities but agree that all of these are important areas for action by local authorities. We welcome the work of the Communities and Local Government Committee on climate change and existing housing and we have conducted a separate inquiry on new housing. Procurement is a key issue. Hilary Knox, Deputy Director, Association of North East Councils, said that local authorities were not only large estate managers but were large procurers of goods and services. She told us that if more of the £8bn spent procuring goods and services in the North East could be targeted towards sustainable procurement it would make a real difference.16 We were told that the scale of local government procurement was the order of £50bn17 and several of those submitting evidence to our inquiry agreed that procurement should be a priority area for action by local authorities.18 Procurement, housing, transport and adaptation are obviously areas where local authorities could expect to make significant progress but how these are balanced will depend on local circumstances. The Government made clear its national priorities in the Comprehensive Spending Review and has put real effort into cascading these to local government through Government Offices and the guidance it has produced. The selection of priorities by local authorities will be determined by their scope for action and any particular competency they have. But it is important that

13 Ev 133

14 DCLG and Defra, Climate change and sustainability: the crucial role of the new local performance framework, December 2007


16 Q50

17 Q1

18 Q26, Q130 and Ev 28


efforts to spread best practice and to provide advice and guidance draw their examples from the agreed priorities.

The local government response

7. A systematic, consistent and urgent response is needed from local government. There is some evidence that this is beginning to happen with:

• public commitments to tackle climate change;

• recognition for good practice through the Beacon Council Scheme;

• impact studies for each region, recognition of climate change in Regional Spatial Strategies and Regional Economic Strategies; and

• the development of climate action plans.19

8. However, the Environment Agency described the response as patchy and said historically there had been a rather poor picture; action has not been consistent or co-ordinated, and there is considerable variation in the quality of outcomes.20 A significant number of local authorities in England have yet to make a public commitment to tackle climate change.21 Follow-up has been poor even where public commitments have been made. Adaptation was often overlooked in plans and, where it was not, action has tended to be weak.

9. Today, the policy landscape is changing rapidly and greater attention is being paid to climate change in the policies and priorities of central Government. This will have a significant impact on the profile that climate change has at a local, regional or devolved level. Philip Mind, Senior Policy Consultant at the Local Government Association, told the Committee,

A lot will change over the next few years, as a number of policy drivers that have been put in place at the national level start to be implemented. For the first time, we will have carbon reduction performance indicators in the performance management framework. The largest local authorities will be subject to a carbon trading regime. We have a sustainable energy measures report which brings together best practice. There are a number of things which are happening now, therefore, which will encourage local action.22

The Local Government Association has recognised the pivotal role local authorities have to play and has made climate change one of its priorities for 2008.23 The work of the LGA’s Commission on Climate Change has helped to draw attention to the issues. Changes to the local government performance framework, the Sub-National Review of Economic

19 Ev 2

20 Ev 145

21 See paragraph 39.

22 Q4

23 Ev 1


Development and Regeneration, changes to Planning Policy Statements, and new legislation, such as the Planning Bill, the Energy Bill, and the Climate Change Bill will all encourage action.24 We discuss some of these changes later in our report. It is too early to say whether changes in the policy framework, regional co-ordination and the performance management of local authorities will bring about the step change in activity on climate change that is needed.25 It is clear, however, that support from central Government will be crucial in making it happen.26

Barriers to action

10. It was clear from the evidence we received that there are several barriers to action on climate change. Professor John Chesshire OBE, Chairman of the Local Government Association’s Climate Change Commission, told us that local authorities had the discretion to act but lacked the motivation.27 The Association of North East Councils made a similar point.28 Other barriers identified include:

• cost and lack of capital;

• lack of political support;

• lack of people (staff and staff time) and skills (particularly project management and related skills);

• lack of recognition of climate change as a significant issue;

• resistance by the local community;

• lack of incentives and clear responsibility; and

• conflicting priorities29

11. Local, regional and devolved government will never be successful in overcoming barriers to progress on climate change if they lack the motivation to take action or the barriers they face are too high. External inspection, audit and challenge will undoubtedly play an important part in providing motivation, as will changes to the policy and performance management frameworks. The Government must look carefully at the incentives and encouragements it can offer to local, regional and devolved government and the steps it can take to help them overcome barriers to action.

24 Ev 146-148

25 Q119

26 Ev 3

27 Q2

28 Ev 30

29 Ev 107, Ev 93, Ev 111, Ev 46-47, Ev 134


3 The policy and performance management frameworks

Policy and policy coherence

12. The draft Climate Change Bill will set legally binding nation-wide targets to reduce emissions of CO2 by 26-32% by 2020, and 60% by 2050. There are a number of different policy measures to deliver emissions reductions that will impact on local, regional and devolved government, including:

• the carbon reduction commitment;

• support for distributed energy;

• a duty in the Sustainable Energy and Climate Change Act 2006 on councils to ‘have regard’ to Government guidance on sustainable energy when ‘exercising their functions’;

• a climate change duty in the Greater London Authority Act 2006 on the Greater London Authority that includes both mitigation and adaptation;

• proposals in the draft Local Transport Bill to increase flexibility for councils to introduce local road user charging pilots; and

• a UK Adaptation Policy Framework.30

13. Other instruments with an impact on local or regional action on climate change include:

• Planning Policy Statement 1 on sustainable development, the new supplement to it on climate change and planning policy statement on economic development, development and flood risk (PPS25) and on Renewable Energy (PPS22);

• the Code for Sustainable Homes;

• Building a Greener Future: Towards Zero Carbon Development (consultation on proposals to reduce the carbon footprint of new housing development);

• the Energy Efficiency Commitment;

• the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 and the duty to prepare an energy conservation report on residential accommodation;31

• the Decent Homes Standard;

• the DfT’s Smarter Choices initiatives (promoting more sustainable forms of transport);

30 LGA, Strengthening local action on climate change, Interim report by the Commission on Climate Change, July 2007

31 This is subject to a consultation by Defra. The Association for the Conservation of Energy indicated Defra was minded to repeal the legislation. (Ev 162)


• the Sustainable Travel Towns initiative;

• Local Transport Planning guidance (LPT2-2004); and

• the Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act (2006).

14. The Government has recognised that an integrated approach to economic growth can provide opportunities to increase local prosperity through jobs in new cleaner, greener technologies.32 But it must have a strategic framework with clear and coherent policies on climate change; climate change priorities need to be applied consistently across the breadth of policy development and the PSAs.33 The Green Alliance told the Committee this was needed to bring about a step change in action at a local level.34 The East of England Regional Development Agency stressed that the policy framework had to be underpinned by robust evidence and intelligence.35

15. Some of those who submitted evidence, like Hilary Knox from the Association of North East Councils, argued that there was already clarity and coherence in the policy framework and suggested the focus should be on helping local partners find an appropriate balance.36 In contrast, others, like WWF and the South East Climate Change Partnership, argued policy tensions made progress difficult. Some saw tensions in policy at a national level. WWF said the Government’s over-riding focus on economic development lead to a position where action on climate change almost impossible.37 Others saw a tension between policies focused on economic growth and those aimed at achieving sustainable development.38 The South East Climate Change Partnership said,

Short-term economic decision making is perhaps the key barrier to delivering the necessary changes, both locally and nationally. The regional bodies are taking steps to overcome this through setting long-term regional strategies, including action on climate change. However, there remains some tension between the sustainable development objectives in these strategies and national policies, especially regarding housing development, transport and energy policies.39

Warwickshire Council said there was a serious lack of management in the deployment of short- and long-term economic advice. It cited the conflict between Kate Barker’s report on short-term housing supply, which called for the planning system to have a lighter touch on development, and Stern’s work on the longer-term impacts of climate change on the economy, which called for more requirements to be imposed on development.40

32 Department for Communities and Local Government and Defra, Climate Change and Sustainability: the crucial role

of the new local performance framework, Dec 2007.

33 Ev 97

34 Ev 133

35 Ev 105

36 Q67

37 Ev 113

38 Q30

39 Ev 129

40 Ev 171


16. The Society for Motor Manufacturers and Traders said mixed messages from different levels of government could cause confusion and lessen the impact of climate change policies.41 WWF said,

Government consistently sends confusing messages to Regions with conflicting policy requirements. This is most obviously seen in the conflict between the support by central Government for regional airport expansion with the expectation to reduce climate change emissions.42

The Wildlife Trusts criticised the extent to which Government policy was joined-up. Giving planning as an example, they said, ‘Proposed reforms in planning and regional governance for example within CLG, threaten to undermine the concept of environmentally sustainable development by giving disproportionate weight to economic growth’.43 Several witnesses were concerned about the impact of the Sub-National Review and the Planning Bill. WWF said the proposed reorganisation of regional government structures emphasised economic development rather than sustainable development.44 The South East Climate Change Partnership saw changes proposed in the Planning Bill as reducing local participation on major infrastructure projects.45

17. The Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, Phil Woolas MP, said there was no policy inconsistency; climate change had been taken into account in both the Sub-National Review and the regional priorities built into the PSA for regional economic achievement.46 He argued that public sector leadership and management understood the arguments presented in the Stern Report but that this understanding did not translate into decision making. In our Report on the structure of Government and the challenge of climate change we found that in the past policy had failed to coherently address the need to reduce emissions.47 We believe that local and regional government has in the past faced contradictions in national policy on climate change. Some problems with cross-government policy co-ordination remain; there are tensions between regional airport expansion and the need to limit emissions from aviation; it is not clear how the targets to build more homes will be compatible with efforts to lower emissions; increased road building and lack of a national strategy on road pricing are incompatible with the need to reduce emissions from road transport; it is unclear how district renewable energy and district heating are to be taken into account.

18. The Climate Change Bill will help but the Government must minimise the inconsistencies between policies and ensure departments across Whitehall have a joined up approach to climate change. Government must also provide clear advice and

41 Ev 153

42 Ev 113

43 Ev 122

44 Ev 113

45 Ev 129

46 Q163 [Woolas]

47 Environmental Audit Committee, Ninth Report of session 2006–07, The structure of Government and the challenge of climate change, HC740, para 26.


help local, regional and devolved government understand how tensions in policy are to be reconciled, particularly how economic growth and sustainable development are to be prioritised. Economic and environmental policies must be integrated if we are to successfully move to a low-carbon economy.

Local Government Performance Framework

19. Climate change has not been an explicit priority for local government. However, the new local government performance framework will set new requirements for local authorities, and explicitly includes action on climate change. In the Local Government White Paper, Strong and prosperous communities, the Government set out its vision for a new local government performance framework.48 Under it local authorities must develop a Sustainable Community Strategy for which Local Area Agreements would be the ‘delivery plan’.49

Local Area Agreements and indicators for local government

20. Local Area Agreements (LAAs) are three-year agreements between central Government, the top tier of local government and their partners specifying performance measurement indicators, agreed outcomes, and funding. A local authority’s principal improvement targets will be negotiated with central Government within its LAA. Each LAA will include up to 35 national priority targets, selected from 198 indicators, along with 16 statutory targets on educational attainment and early years.50 The indicators within the LAA will be the only ones on which central Government will be able to set targets for local government.51 LAAs will be specific to a locality and outcome-based so that, while central Government is interested in what is delivered, it will be up to local partners to decide how to do it. Multi Area Agreements (MAAs) use the framework and principles of Local Area Agreements but facilitate cross-border working and collaboration at sub-regional level particularly on economic development.52 MAAs are at an early stage of development but could become important as they become more established. Local Area Agreements will be an important route for central Government funding of local authorities. Councils will receive an area based grant not tied to any specific programmes.53 With LAAs funds previously allocated for specific purposes can be ‘pooled’; local authorities, in partnership with a Local Strategic Partnership, can decide how the money is spent, so long as they meet the outcome targets specified in their LAAs.54 A reward grant is available for good

48 Department for Communities and Local Government, Strong and prosperous communities, Cm 6939, 26 October

2006

49 Department for Communities and Local Government and Defra, Climate Change and Sustainability: the crucial role of the new local performance framework, Dec 2007.


51 Department for Communities and Local Government, National Indicators for Local Authorities and Local Authority Partnerships: Handbook of Definitions, April 2008.

52 Library Research Paper 07/06, Sustainable Communities Bill (Bill No. 17 of Session 2006–07), Jan 2007

53 “Putting all the pieces in place”, Local Government Chronicle, 5 June 2008, pp18-19



performance against an LAA. Ministers are expected to sign off the LAAs in June and any announcement on them is likely to be made at the LGA’s conference early in July.55

21. The involvement of local partners, including the third sector and the private sector, will be important in mobilising local action on climate change.56 Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) bring together public, voluntary and private local organisations. The Environment Agency, Natural England, the National Parks and Broads Authority are all under a statutory duty to co-operate with local authorities to agree LAA targets, and to have regard, in the course of their business, to those they have agreed.57 Local authorities with their partners can agree additional targets in their LAA to support improved local delivery and outcomes, though these will not be subject to performance monitoring by the Government. This means that local strategic partnerships producing LAAs can, if they wish, increase the profile given to climate change in their LAA. The LGA Chair, Simon Milton, has called for all local authorities to have indicators on climate change at the core of their LAAs.58 Climate change is an area where one might expect to see priorities for local government being set nationally. Targets can be justified for local government on issues of national or international importance that may not be driving local priorities. All local authorities should be obliged to include the climate change indicators in their Local Area Agreements, either as negotiated targets or as voluntary targets.

22. The new performance framework reduces the number of indicators for local government from around 1200 to 198. They reflect priorities identified for central and local government in the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.59 A number of the indicators in the national set specifically address climate change and environmental sustainability. The three climate change related indicators are:

• NI 185: CO2 reduction from local authority operations

• NI 186: Percentage reduction of the per capita CO2 emissions in the Local Authority Area

• NI 188: Planning to Adapt to Climate Change.

23. The Energy Saving Trust felt the new performance indicators, Local Area Agreements and the Comprehensive Area Assessments (see paragraph 27) would help to ensure climate change was on local authorities’ agenda and would drive up performance across the board.60 The East of England Regional Development Agency felt the performance indicators would provide a real impetus for action at a local level through LSPs and LAAs.61


56 Ev 109


58 Ev 3

59 Department for Communities and Local Government, National Indicators for Local Authorities and Local Authority Partnerships: Handbook of Definitions, April 2008.

60 Ev 42

61 Ev 106


24. However, the Nottingham Declaration Partnership said that with 198 indicators competing for attention, the inclusion of 3 on climate change would not guarantee action.62 The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) thought the new indicators were unlikely to have much impact locally unless taken up as one of the 35 priorities.63 The South East Climate Change Partnership noted that the lack of any requirement for them to be included in LAAs might affect the chance of meeting regional and national targets.64 Warwickshire Council pointed out that the way the indicators were handled made the whole issue discretionary and therefore one that would lose out against the inevitable budget process.65 Bob Fiddik, Sustainability Manager at Southwark Council, said if climate change was included in the community strategy then all three indicators should be selected in the Local Area Agreement.66

25. The Government has been careful to point out that all the priorities identified in the Local Area Agreement can make a contribution to tackling climate change and protecting the environment.67 The Wildlife Trusts argued that climate change indicators should be seen as underpinning activity in other areas like planning, transport, waste and water.68 Early indications are that large numbers of local authorities were adopting or intending to adopt performance indicators related to climate change.69 Phil Woolas said,

I believe [the indicator on percentage reduction of the per capita CO2 emissions in a local authority] is one of the most empowering articles for local government that there has been for many decades within the context of the international recognition of climate change and the domestic policy statutory and financial changes which are going on. That will allow, say, a council in the North East to work with ConocoPhillips, who have the largest combined heat and power plant in Europe, to have a strategy to do more, to the benefit of that area and the UK economy, so I am very, very excited. I hope we get 150 local authorities signed up to [it] and we will be watching DCLG’s statements very closely70

26. Defra seems to have been successful in persuading councils to include the climate change indicators; the indicator on emissions in a local area is one of the top three indicators selected by local authorities.71 Councils have clearly responded to the fact that the Government has made climate change a national priority. But there was also some evidence of tensions over the inclusion of indicators; Barking and Dagenham Council, a council that has been awarded beacon status for its work on climate change, has resisted pressure from the Government Office for London to include the climate change indicators

62 Ev 141

63 Ev 46

64 Ev 127

65 Ev 171

66 Q79


68 Ev 123

69 Q124

70 Q165



in its LAA. They argued that it would be impossible to reduce emissions given the current regeneration of the Thames Gateway.72 Whether or not a local authority has included the climate change indicators in its LAA, thinking about actions to reduce emissions and to adapt to the likely changes in climate should be part of the warp and weft of decision making in local authorities. The Government must make sure that local authorities are acting to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change across their full range of activities, and that the introduction of the indicators does not compartmentalise thinking about these issues. It is not just actions taken specifically in relation to the climate change indicators that have a role to play in reducing emissions or adapting to climate change. What is important is making sure that local authorities are considering the need to reduce emissions and to adapt to climate change in all of their investment and development plans.

Comprehensive Area Assessment

27. Central and local government have a shared objective of ensuring that public money is spent effectively and efficiently and that outcomes for local people are improving.73 Regular self-assessment will play an important part in the new performance management framework. However, external challenge is important. The Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) will measure performance in an area against all 198 indicators,74 not just the 35 (plus 16 educational and early years) indicators selected as local priorities for improvement in the LAA.75 Local authorities will be able to ‘monitor’ performance across all 198 indicators but their primary focus will be on the 35 indicators selected as part of their LAA. The Comprehensive Area Assessment will be carried out by local public service inspectorates, including the Audit Commission, working together. Their role is important.76 The Audit Commission and six other inspectorates are jointly developing an approach, which will be introduced from April 2009. As part of the CAA, the Audit Commission will ask if organisations are making effective use of their resources. This includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change. There is a growing commitment from the Audit Commission to addressing climate change in its assessments, and it had indicated in its ‘Use of Resources Assessment’ that it would look at how well an authority was tackling climate change in its use of resources.77 A focus on resource efficiency is useful but it should be remembered that it does not necessarily equate to lower carbon emissions. Each year’s CAA will have four elements:

• an area risk assessment identifying risks to outcomes and the effectiveness of their management;

• a scored use of resources judgement for public bodies in the area;


73 HMG and LGA, An Introduction to the Local Performance Framework—Delivering Better Outcomes for Local People, November 2007

74 HMG and LGA, An Introduction to the Local Performance Framework—Delivering Better Outcomes for Local People, November 2007

75 Q108

76 Q43

77 Ev 141


• a scored direction of travel judgement for each local authority in the area; and

• publication of performance data for each area against the set of national indicators.78

28. The LGA recognised that the Audit Commission needed to develop its capacity to help it meet its stated desire of placing greater emphasis on sustainability as long-term value for money requires the sustainable use of resources.79 The Energy Saving Trust also stressed the importance of ensuring that staff of the Audit Commission had the necessary skills.80 The assurance that the new performance framework is delivering will come from the independent Comprehensive Area Assessments carried out by the Audit Commission and other local inspectorates. We commend the work done by the Audit Commission and its partners to develop the framework for inspection. The Government must ensure that this work is adequately resourced and that the Audit Commission and the other inspectorates are able to recruit and develop the skills and expertise they will need.

Targets

29. Defra publishes annual experimental statistics on CO2 emissions at local and regional level in the UK. These provide estimates of total CO2 emissions and per capita emissions. They provide a breakdown of emissions into three key sectors—‘industrial, commercial and public’, ‘domestic’ and ‘road transport’. This data is intended to be used by local authorities and regional bodies to inform target setting81 and local targets could help drive local action.82

30. Groundwork, an environmental regeneration charity, said that the new indicators on climate change were welcome but argued that local targets might do more to stimulate action than inclusion of the indicators in Local Area Agreements.83 Clearly there will be targets agreed with central Government on the indicators in Local Area Agreements and local authorities and their partners could agree voluntary targets over and above those agreed with central Government in the LAA. It is important to remember that the Comprehensive Area Assessment will report on all indicators not just those for which an improvement target has been agreed.

31. The Government is not in favour of disaggregated targets but recognises that ‘the target at a local level needs to take account of what can be done at that local level’.84 The Government argued that there were sectoral and spatial approaches to reducing emissions. It did not matter that the sum of the spatial targets might be less than the national target because of the other approaches. They argued that cascading national targets was not

78 Department for Communities and Local Government and Defra, Climate Change and Sustainability: the crucial role

of the new local performance framework, Dec 2007.

79 Ev 3

80 Ev 42

81 Ev 61

82 Ev 61

83 Ev 111

84 Q133


consistent with greater devolution to local authorities;85 Iain Wright said the Government did not want to dictate to local government.86 Phil Woolas acknowledged that the statutory framework imposed by the Climate Change Bill would force the government of the day to address overall whether targets were being met by the different sectoral and spatial contributions.87

32. WWF said a clear message was needed about what was expected of local authorities, especially with regard to targets.88 In the absence of disaggregated national targets local, regional and devolved government have been free to set their own targets. Scotland has indicated its own emissions target for 2050 will be an 80% rather than 60% reduction. The Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030. The South East Climate Change Partnership said local targets were being set by local authorities and regional bodies and it was only when national targets were clear that it would be possible to see how the local targets fitted with them.89 Any delay in setting national targets could lead to some authorities delaying action until they are sure it will be recognised.90 The Regional Development Agencies were clear that National Climate Change Programme targets and regional targets must knit together.91

33. The LGA does not support desegregation of targets but saw national targets guiding local targets.92 WWF thought local authorities should contribute to emissions reductions in-line with or exceeding national targets,93 while the North West Regional Development Agency said national targets must be disaggregated. It saw the proliferation of local targets (driven in part by the new indicator set) as potentially damaging because they could ‘drive a wedge between local and regional aspiration’.94 The East of England Development Agency said there was a need for clarity about whether targets would be cascaded or whether targets set locally, in the absence of targets set by Government, would be accepted.95

34. Accurate and reliable data are essential to support targets.96 It will be difficult to set baselines against which to measure progress in the absence of reliable data, especially on adaptation.97 There are some steps that can be taken to improve the information available. Bob Fiddik wanted councils to have better access to data on the use of electricity and gas locally; issues around confidentiality could be addressed by removing certain elements of

85 Q133 [Hughes]

86 Q126 [Wright]

87 Q134

88 Ev 113

89 Ev 127

90 Ev 127

91 Ev 100

92 Ev 3

93 Ev 114

94 Ev 94

95 Ev 106

96 Ev 100

97 Ev 126


the data.98 National roll-out of smart meters could help to provide more accurate consumption data.99 There are other sources of data. The Energy Saving Trust has a Homes Energy Efficiency Database, which provides a picture of energy efficiency measures taken in UK housing stock;100 the LGA’s Commission on Climate Change noted that access to the database was more difficult than it needed to be.

35. We would expect that where the climate change indicators on reducing CO2 are included in a Local Area Agreement they will be accompanied by improvement targets that would be in line with, or run ahead of, national targets. It is important that targets are based on good data. Baselines will need to be set carefully. Targets for the adaptation indicator are much more difficult to construct; the indicator is about planning to adapt rather than measuring an outcome. The Government will need to help local authorities develop appropriate targets on adaptation. We discuss this at paragraph 74. Bob Fiddik argued that in reporting on the indicators councils should be able to provide a commentary.101 This would allow councils to explain and perhaps make adjustments for the weather but also put progress, or the lack of it, into some context by explaining the impact of, for example, local regeneration. We see no barrier to councils producing this kind of commentary.

36. We are encouraged that many of those who have set targets have demonstrated clear leadership and set targets that are more ambitious than the national targets. We understand the concerns the Government has about disaggregating national targets. The Committee on Climate Change will need to assess whether the sum of all the different spatial and sectoral approaches puts the UK on track to meet its targets for reducing emissions. If national targets are not disaggregated they should at least inform local target setting; regional government has a particular role to play in ensuring that local targets take account of both local factors and national targets.

37. It is important that local, regional and devolved governments do not focus exclusively on targets for reducing emissions in their efforts to tackle climate change. They have important contributions to make to other national targets such as those on use of renewable energy. The Renewable Energy Association said that local authorities needed to have targets for the use of renewables on their own estates and in households in their area so that their contribution to the UK’s proportion of the EU’s 20% renewables target could be assessed.102 Clearly, it is important that targets are stretching; in London the target for renewables in new developments was routinely met at 10% and has been increased to 20%.103 The Government should ensure that local, regional and devolved governments are aware of the range of targets beyond those on emissions and adaptation that action on climate change supports, like for example indicators on biodiversity, energy and energy efficiency.

98 Q79

99 Ev 120

100 Ev 42

101 Q84

102 Ev 154

103 Ev 101


4 Putting climate change on the agenda 38. Iain Wright stressed the importance of getting climate change on to the mainstream agenda, saying ‘Sustainable development and thinking about climate change should be at the heart of what we do’.104 The Local Government Association said there should be proper mainstreaming105 and Councillor Paul Bettison, Chairman of Local Government Association Environment Board, argued that climate change needs to be ‘embedded within local authorities and, indeed, in all organisations’.106 Phil Woolas said that the Government was doing a number of things to help ensure climate change was on the agenda of local authorities, such as spreading best practice through the Beacon Council Scheme.107 Changes in the policy framework and the performance management of local authorities will do a great deal to put consideration of climate change on the mainstream agenda in local and regional government. In this section of our report we examine some of the other efforts to raise awareness of climate change issues and to make them part of the mainstream agenda, including the Nottingham Declaration, efforts to engage political leaders and senior staff, the powers local authorities have and the case for a statutory duty, efforts to address skills and knowledge gaps and work to improve regional co-ordination.

The Nottingham Declaration

39. The Nottingham Declaration is a commitment by local authorities in England to ‘develop plans with our partners and local communities to progressively address the causes and the impacts of climate change, according to our local priorities, securing maximum benefit for our communities’.108 The LGA has called on all councils to sign the Nottingham Declaration.109 All Scottish and Welsh Councils had signed their equivalent of the Declaration and the Nottingham Declaration Partnership said more that 280 English councils had signed the Declaration. At the time we took evidence, around 100 councils in England had not signed it.110 Since then the Local Government Association has launched its ‘Small Change, Big Difference’ campaign and by May more than 330 councils had signed the Declaration.111 The Partnership argued the benefit of the Declaration lay in committing senior management (both political leaders and chief executives) to take action.112 Steve Waller said,

[The Declaration’s] value is in the numbers that have signed it. It is a single side statement of a local authority’s commitment at the most senior level to address climate change, to work with partners and to address key elements of local

104 Q162 [Wright]

105 Ev 2

106 Q37 [Bettison]

107 Q127 [Woolas]

108 The Nottingham Declaration. See www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/housingbuildings/localauthorities/NottinghamDeclaration/

109 Ev 2

110 Q88

111 LGA Press Release, 9 May 2008. See www.lga.gov.uk/lga/core/page.do?pageId=545773

112 Ev 140


government responsibility to both reduce carbon emissions themselves, to reduce carbon emissions within the community and then also to integrate adaptation measures, both internally and externally as well. At its minimum it is just that, it has clearly been attractive to local authorities as a way of making a public statement, and I visit many councils who have a framed copy of it, signed, hung up in their reception as just that, as a public statement of their commitment to addressing climate change.113

Some of the evidence presented to us said the Nottingham Declaration had been successful in raising awareness.114 Hilary Knox said it helped ensure real commitment; all councils in the North East had signed it and had developed climate change action plans.115

40. However, some of those giving evidence to us found there were more effective ways of raising the profile of climate change within a council; Warwickshire Council told us they found that the Carbon Trust’s Local Authority Carbon Management Action plan had generated more discussion and engagement within their council than signing the Nottingham Declaration.116 Signing the declaration is just the first step; co-ordinated local and regional action is needed to deliver and move beyond commitments.117 Some councils have taken little or no action since signing the Declaration.118 Steve Waller accepted that the response of signatories had been varied.119 The North West Regional Development Agency pointed out that signing the Nottingham Declaration proved nothing if it was not backed up by the resources to turn commitment into action.120

41. The Nottingham Declaration Partnership proposed a new voluntary accreditation scheme to encourage action beyond the initial public commitment.121 Such a scheme could provide the Audit Commission with useful evidence of how well a council was responding to adaptation and mitigation and provide assurance about local actions.122 Any accreditation scheme would have to be voluntary. Councils could progress through different levels of achievement (for example, bronze, silver and gold) based largely on self-assessment but with external assessment at the higher levels.123 In this way costs associated with the scheme could be kept to a minimum. The costs associated with external verification might be covered by councils as they do for similar schemes on equalities or environmental management.124

113 Q86

114 Ev 26

115 Q66

116 Ev 171

117 Ev 126

118 Ev 171

119 Q100

120 Ev 94

121 Ev 140-141

122 Q92

123 Q87

124 Q90


42. The Nottingham Declaration has been useful in providing a starting point for action by local authorities but these public commitments must be turned into real actions; this must be about more than a framed copy of a declaration hung in the reception area of a council building. Assessment and verification is important and the Government should work with the Nottingham Partners to develop a scheme that combines self-assessment and external verification of actions. The Government and the Audit Commission should examine what role such a scheme could play in assessing the performance of local authorities as part of Comprehensive Area Assessments and therefore what priority should be given to developing some kind of externally verified scheme.

Engaging political leaders and senior staff

43. In many local authorities climate change is still seen as a purely environmental issue and is dealt with by a small team rather than being integrated into decision making and policy across the board in the local authority.125 Dr Chris West, Director, UK Climate Impacts Programme, said one of the reasons councils failed to make progress was, ‘… that although climate change is acknowledged to be a central cross-cutting issue it actually has a home in many organisations, in councils in particular, in the environment directorate’.126 He said, ‘When the finance director takes notice we know that they have taken a quantum jump in dealing with the issue’.127 He argued that at top board level the issue was not appreciated because senior staff had no experience of it.

44. There is an over-reliance on wilful individuals.128 ‘Wilful individual’ is a term, that has been used to describe determined individuals who have been effective at bringing about change or delivering projects and activities, often in the face of barriers and obstruction.129 Philip Mind told the Committee that ‘Most of the action that has taken place so far in the exemplar authorities has been attributed […] to wilful individuals’.130 Iain Wright, while recognising the importance of mainstreaming climate change issues,131 stressed the importance of ‘wilful individuals’ and encouraging people to recognise that they could make a difference on an individual level.132 We acknowledge the impact and contribution ‘wilful individuals’ have made and they have a role to play still in championing the issue. But mainstreaming action on climate change must be more than this; it must get beyond ‘wilful individuals’ if it is to bring about the step change in the level of activity that is needed.

125 Ev 129

126 Q115

127 Q115

128 Q114 and Ev 133

129 DEFRA, Mobilising individual behavioural change through community initiatives: Lessons for Climate Change, A Report by the Centre for Sustainable Energy (CSE) and Community Development Xchange (CDX) for DEFRA, DCLG, DTI, DfT and HMT, February 2007

130 Q4

131 Q125 [Wright]

132 Q126 [Wright]


45. Developments in the policy framework will have an impact on how the climate change agenda is seen. Phil Woolas thought the Climate Change Bill would have a major impact.133 He also said that the Carbon Reduction Commitment, which starts in April 2010, would make the response to climate change a ‘matter of financial interest’, changing the way it was viewed.134 He said, ‘We believe the carbon reduction commitment will change the way in which public sector management behaves because it will make it part of the balance sheet and the income and expenditure account’.135 He thought this would be the tipping point at which the issue moved from ‘the Cabinet Member or chairs of environment committees’ in-trays to the lead Member on finance, the chief executive and leaders’ in-trays’.136

46. The Government must ensure policies, like the Carbon Reduction Commitment, make a difference to the way climate change is handled in local government so that it becomes an issue that engages the political leaders and senior officials and not just the band of ‘wilful individuals’ in environment teams.

Making it part of the decision making process

47. One of the recommendations of the Local Government Association’s Commission on Climate Change was that every major policy planning or investment or spending decision should have a carbon impact assessment. Philip Mind said such a mechanism could help ‘mainstream tackling climate change right across a council’s functions’.137 The Local Government Association supported the call for the introduction of a whole-life cycle costing approach.138 Both the North West Regional Development Agency and WWF made similar points about embedding carbon reduction criteria in decision making and funding processes.139 WWF argued that an approach that used embedded carbon could even be used to ensure emissions generated outside an authority’s geographical area were counted.140 Bob Fiddik said that buying the best environmental product or service depended on being able to compare whole-life costs, not just the up front capital costs; but that this approach was not common in the public sector. He noted that the way financing in local authorities was structured did not help; separate capital and revenue budgets meant that savings from revenue could not easily be transferred back into capital budgets to help pay for more environmental sustainable products, which often had higher up front capital costs. The organisation of funding streams in local government reflected the way funding was arranged and passed down by central Government.141 The Government should consider what part carbon impact assessments should play in local, regional and devolved government. It should assess what support would be needed to allow carbon

133 Q126 [Woolas]

134 Q125 [Woolas], Q130

135 Q130

136 Q158

137 Q28

138 Ev 2

139 Ev 94 and Ev 114

140 Ev 114

141 Q51


impact assessments to play a central role in local, regional and devolved government decision and policy making process and then issue guidance to encourage their use. It must also look at the extent to which the organisation of budgets and funding streams is a barrier to a whole-life costing approach.

Powers

The case for a statutory duty

48. One of the LGA’s Commission on Climate Change’s key recommendations was the need to consider the statutory underpinning for local government action on climate change.142 Some of the evidence presented to us argued for a statutory requirement for action to be taken on climate change or for the statutory basis for action to be strengthened in a number of areas.143 Groundwork cautioned against imposing a one-size fits all solution; they said local areas should have the autonomy to decide what action to take on climate change.144 Professor Chesshire said, ‘I am not yet convinced that […] slapping a statutory duty on anybody necessarily accelerates momentum or achieves an outcome.’145 He argued it would be more meaningful, particularly in terms of encouraging action, to have a number of specific powers.146 He said the aim should be to provide a ‘richer statutory context in which local authorities are empowered to act’ and suggested to us that the opportunity presented by legislation currently before the House should be used to ‘pepper’ the statute book with requirements on local authorities that would focus attention and increase activity.147 There are plenty of opportunities to do this. For example, the Environment Agency said the Climate Change Bill should place a duty on all public bodies to take future climate change impacts into account when exercising their functions.148

49. There are other examples. Concepts in the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 could be extended to climate change by adding a provision to the Climate Change Bill to require specific bodies, including local authorities, to undertake a climate change risk assessment of their planning and investments and to identify an action plan to address the risks.149 The Planning Bill, currently before the House, contains a provision to ensure that development plan documents included policies to ensure that the development and use of land in a local authority’s area contributes to mitigation of and adaptation to climate change.150 The Environment Agency argued that there was a case for a similar provision aimed at regional bodies.151 Iain Wright said this was unnecessary because Regional Development Agencies had a duty with regard to sustainable development, by virtue of the RDA 1998 Act,152 and

142 Q29

143 Ev 148

144 Ev 112

145 Q45

146 Q45

147 Q33

148 Ev 146

149 Ev 146

150 Ev 147

151 Ev 147


the Sub-National Review would ensure that sustainable development was properly embedded.153

50. Phil Woolas said that the combination of the new Local Government Performance Framework and a duty to co-operate with partners would provide the necessary underpinning.154 The Local Government’s Commission on Climate Change recommended that over the next two years, there must be a significant and measurable improvement in the local government response to climate change and that a statutory duty should be imposed on those councils that fail to respond.155 Phil Woolas said that if the UK was not able to show that the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions was in line with requirements the question of a statutory duty to tackle climate change would have to be re-examined.156

51. By and large, we believe that the current approach to a statutory power to tackle climate change is correct. There are already powers for local government that permit action and the lack of a statutory duty does not seem to be holding back the more innovative local authorities. The Government should examine carefully the case for improving the statutory underpinning for action on climate change; each new bill should be examined to see what scope there is for requirements on local, regional and devolved government to be inserted in order to focus attention and increase activity. The Government should be ready to intervene early if there are any indications that the steps it has taken are not delivering the kind of change in the level of activity on climate change that is needed.

Using existing powers effectively

52. Echoing what the Secretary of State said when the Local Government White Paper was launched, Phil Woolas said,

Characteristic of that new regime is the requirement for a management and leadership culture which says, ‘We can do things,’ rather than, ‘Government won’t let us do things’157

Local authorities have powers that they can use to take action on climate change. Some councils have applied themselves to the issue of climate change and the barriers to action creatively. For example Kirklees Council has launched a scheme to promote renewables. Their scheme tries to address the principal barriers to the uptake of renewables by homeowners such as cost, confidence in the technology, its capabilities and how it was installed. Private householders will be able to install up to £10,000 of renewable technology in their homes and pay for it when their home is sold via a second charge on the property.

152 Q128

153 Q128 and Q129

154 Q142 [Woolas]


156 Q144

157 Q147


The Renewable Energy Association called on the Government to encourage local authorities to set up schemes like Kirklees’ Recharge Scheme.158

53. Some legislation has helped to simulate action on climate change. The Home Energy Conservation Act 1995, was the result of a Private Members Bill sponsored by Diana Maddock MP, now Baroness Maddock. It required all UK local authorities with housing responsibilities to prepare an energy conservation report identifying measures to significantly improve the energy efficiency of all residential accommodation in their area and to report on progress in implementing the measures. In their memorandum, the Association for the Conservation of Energy (ACE) said HECA was the only legislation-backed policy on climate change mitigation specifically addressing local government. Groundwork said HECA had created a climate change capacity in some councils although others saw the legislation as a burden rather than a platform for further action.159 ACE argued the legislation was being allowed to ‘wither on the vine’ despite the Energy Saving Trust showing it to be by far the most effective energy saving programme before the introduction of the Energy Efficiency Commitment. They said Defra seem to have little interest in enforcing HECA, had not effectively pursued those who do not submit reports in time, were late in publishing figures and seem unconcerned about the accuracy of returns.160 In 2007, Defra reviewed HECA to assess its contribution in delivering improvements in energy efficiency for households.161 The review informed a consultation on HECA in which the Government set out its preference for HECA to be repealed. Defra has said that the majority of respondents supported the Government’s preference but that some favoured other options, including repeal contingent on other developments, such as progress on the new local government performance framework. Defra continues to consider the future of HECA.

54. The Local Government Act 2000 introduced a new power for local authorities to promote the ‘environmental, economic and social well-being’ of their communities. It provides local authorities with a discretionary power to undertake any action to promote or improve the social, economic and environmental well being of their area.162 The wellbeing power provides an opportunity for councils to tackle complex problems in a sustainable way.163 It encouraged councils to look beyond their immediate service delivery responsibilities to the wider well-being of their areas. It could, for example, be argued that work on adaptation should be a major component of well-being. However, these new well-being powers are not well understood.164 Dr Chris West said, ‘councils struggle with the concept of delivering well-being in the community’.165 Research suggests few local

158 Ev 155

159 Ev 110

160 Ev 161

161 Defra, Summary of responses to the consultation on the Review of the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 (HECA) 11 October 2007– 3 January 2008, June 2008

162 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Formative Evaluation of the Take-Up and Implementation of the Well Being Power, 2003–2006, A baseline report for ODPM from the School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham and the Cities Research Centre, University of the West of England, April 2005

163 Improvement and Development Agency website. See www.idea.gov.uk

164 Q58

165 Q119


authorities are actually using them to support sustainable energy initiatives.166 Although Christine Seaward, Environment Futures Manager at Hampshire County Council, welcomed these powers she said they needed to be linked to other roles and responsibilities within councils and with local partners.167 Phil Woolas thought that well-being powers were recognised by senior people in local authorities but had not filtered down enough.168 Guidance on the well-being powers will be published shortly following an evaluation of them.169

55. There is a difference between a discretionary power, like the well-being powers introduced by the Local Government Act 2000, which allows a council to take some action, and a statutory duty that forces them to take some action. With discretionary powers advice, guidance and action to spread best practice become crucial. The poor take up of the well-being powers shows there are lessons to be leaned from their introduction and welcome the fact that guidance will be published shortly following on from an evaluation of them. The Government should take steps to encourage councils to use the powers available to them creatively and innovatively to reduce emissions and drive forward work on adaptation.

Building knowledge and skills

56. Sharing best practice is a key part of overcoming some of the barriers identified in paragraph 10. The Beacon Councils Scheme, set up to disseminate best practice in service delivery across local government, now includes climate change.170 Iain Wright stressed its importance as a means of highlighting best practice.171 Steve Waller said that 26 councils applied for beacon status in the ‘Tackling Climate Change’ theme in round nine of the Beacon Councils scheme.172 Nine were short-listed and five were awarded beacon status.173 The Energy Measures Report is another example of provision of advice to councils on what could be achieved.174 Published on 18 September 2007, it set out the steps that local authorities could take to:

• improve energy efficiency;

• increase the levels of microgeneration and low carbon technologies;

• reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and

• reduce the number of households living in fuel poverty.


167 Q61

168 Q150 [Woolas]

169 Q155 [Wright]

170 Q100 and Q88

171 Q145

172 Q 88

173 LACORS, ‘Tackling climate change’ Beacon Award winners announced, See www.lacors.gov.uk/lacors/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?id=18912

174 Q155 [Hughes]


57. Local authorities will have to ‘have regard’ to the report when exercising their functions. In addition to spreading best practice, building knowledge and understanding of what is achievable is important and demonstration projects in, for example, low-carbon buildings and technologies, have an important role to play.175 Allied to best practice is the need for better information on the impact of a range of interventions on emissions. Steve Waller said that Defra was considering whether better advice could be provided on the kinds of emissions or emissions reductions associated with different measures and interventions at different spatial levels.176

58. A number of bodies provide assistance on climate change:

• the Carbon Trust and Energy Saving Trust offers advice and support on reducing greenhouse gas emissions to local authorities through schemes such as the Carbon Trust’s Local Authority Carbon Management Programme and the Energy Saving Trust’s key account programme;

• the Improvement and Development Agency supports and promotes local authority action on climate change; and

• UKCIP offers advice on regional impacts and adaptation.177

59. The skills and capacity within local authorities to address climate change issues needs to be considered.178 In Woking, a knowledge base was built up over a number of years by starting with small-scale actions on its own estate. Woking is now one of the leading councils on climate change and says it was the first UK authority to have adopted a comprehensive Climate Change Strategy on a scale likely to meet The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution targets of 60% reductions of CO2 equivalent emissions by 2050 and 80% by 2100.179 There are concerns about the ability and capacity of the various bodies with a remit to support local authorities if the changes in the policy framework bring about a step change in activity and demand for their services increases significantly. The South East Climate Change Partnership said the UK Climate Impacts Programme did not have sufficient staff to provide the kind of support on adaptation that was available on emissions.180 The Association for the Conservation of Energy said agencies, such as the Energy Saving Trust (EST), were setting up and abandoning successful local government programmes and pilots for budgetary reasons.181 The LGA thought that current support for local authorities could be more effectively targeted and said that support could be easily be overstretched as councils start to place more emphasis on climate change.182 The Energy Saving Trust told us that,

175 Ev 96

176 Q95


178 Q36

179 Woking Borough Council website. See www.woking.gov.uk/environment/climatechangestrategy

180 Ev 128

181 Ev 161

182 Ev 4


Whilst the Energy Saving Trust and the members of the Nottingham Declaration Partnership are providing support to LAs to deliver climate change action, the resources required to cover all LAs is well beyond what is currently available. For example, the Energy Saving Trust’s key account management for LAs, at the current level of 30 LAs per year, would take 12 years to cover all LAs.183

60. The Green Alliance told us work was needed to increase skills and ensure that sufficient resources were available.184 The Local Government Association called for a review of the quality of the level of support available and action to address the skills gaps.185 Phil Woolas said because capacity within local authorities was not ‘significant enough’ partnership approaches at a regional and sub-regional level and with the private sector were all important.186 Regional Development Agencies could play a useful part in developing skills and capacity.187

61. Building skills and knowledge in local and regional government is key. There is a real risk that, if the changes in the performance management and policy frameworks deliver a step-change in activity, the bodies providing support could be overwhelmed by demand. The Government should review the level of support available and ensure that action is taken to address any gaps in skills, including identifying how this extra support and action to address gaps in skills is to be funded. This will be vital in the priority areas identified by the LGA’s Commission on Climate Change.

Improving regional co-ordination

Regional structures and strategies

62. There are a number of different regional bodies with an involvement in climate change.

• Regional climate change partnerships bring together public, private and voluntary organisations with the aim of understanding the likely impacts of climate change in the geographical area they cover and then adapting and mitigating the effects of climate change in an integrated way. Not all local authorities belong to regional climate change partnerships.188 They vary in scope and there is uncertainty about their funding in the longer-term.189

• Government Offices (GOs) represent 10 central Government departments in the regions. They work with regional and local partners to ensure that the principles of sustainable development and the priority areas for action, including climate change, are incorporated into all regional strategies and programmes. They have been involved in negotiating and managing elements of the new performance framework.

183 Ev 44

184 Ev 134

185 Ev 2

186 Q161 [Woolas]

187 Ev 107

188 Ev 128

189 Ev 146


• Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) have an established role in shaping strategies and are already acting on climate change.190 They have a remit to improve regional economic performance. The Environment Agency said insufficient attention was paid by RDAs to the economic risks posed by climate change impacts.191 Regional assemblies currently have responsibility for Regional Spatial Strategies but must be consulted by RDAs on the development of Regional Economic Strategies. From 2010, their role will be transferred to Regional Development Agencies.

63. RDAs and Government Offices have a key role to play in the delivery of several PSA targets. They have a strategic responsibility for economic development, transport, housing and spatial planning, including regeneration and the environment. Regional Sustainable Development Frameworks (RSDFs) set out priorities for action and climate change features specifically in some of these frameworks as a theme, objective or indicator. The Regional Economic Strategy sets out a vision for the strategic development of a region while the Regional Spatial Strategy addresses housing, transport and environmental issues. The 2005 guidance on developing Regional Economic Strategies said,

The RES must have a clear focus on economic development, and both it and actions to implement it must be based on sustainable development principles set out in the March 2005 Sustainable Development Strategy. The RES should help advance the shared priorities for UK action set out in the strategy—Sustainable Consumption and Production, Climate Change and Energy, Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement, and Sustainable Communities—in terms that reflect regional distinctiveness. In developing the RES a full sustainability appraisal should be carried out in order to identify how the RDA and its partners will contribute to sustainable development. The appraisal should be informed by the Regional Sustainable Development Framework or the equivalent in the region, and should be published alongside the RES.192

64. It is important to consider how what happens at a local level feeds into the national picture. Clearly, devolved administrations and regional bodies should play their part in ensuring that action at a local level is taken jointly and is well co-ordinated.193 The Environment Agency said that regions should have a strategic overview of climate change.194 The East of England Development Agency told us it was important that the targets in Local Area Agreements were aligned with Regional Economic Strategies and national Climate Change Programme targets.195 They said that Regional Climate Change Action Plans were an important means for ensuring effective co-ordination.196

190 Ev 96

191 Ev 146

192 HM Treasury, BERR and CLG, Review of sub-national economic development and regeneration, July 2007. Available at www.hm-treasury.gov.uk.

193 Ev 113

194 Ev 151

195 Ev 106

196 Ev 106


65. Some witnesses told us that there was good regional and local co-operation on climate change issues.197 For example, London’s sustainable development plan (London’s Plan) has helped to promote energy efficiency, renewables and microgeneration.198 It promoted standards of sustainable building and forced developers to connect to ‘decentralised’ energy supplies.199 Others were less certain about how effective co-operation was. EAGA plc said there was a ‘troubling level of uncertainty in the relationship between [local authorities] and regional bodies’ in terms of responsibility for action on climate change.200 The South East Climate Change Partnership said there was ‘some way to go’ in developing joined up strategy between regional agencies.201

66. Regional co-ordination is important and the Government must ensure that the different players are all clear about their respective roles. We believe that as well as co-ordinating action on climate change between the different spheres of government in the UK, it is important that there is a joined up approach between local, regional and devolved government and other public service provision. For example, local authorities have little control over the decision of a health authority to reconfigure local hospitals but the resulting changes in traffic flows could have an impact on emissions locally.202 Another example is support by central government for regional airport expansion with the expectation that local authorities will reduce climate change emissions.203

Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration

67. Treasury guidance on the Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration stresses that ‘Economic development needs to be taken forward in the context of the challenges of environmental constraints, including the issue of climate change, described by Lord Stern as the greatest global market failure the world has seen’.204 The Government has proposed that there should be a single integrated regional strategy setting out the economic, social and environmental objectives for each region. This will be formed by bringing together the Regional Economic Strategy and the Regional Spatial Strategy. Climate change must be a part of RESs, RSSs and, going forward, the single regional strategies.205 Some witnesses saw these changes as an opportunity. Groundwork said the sub-national review, new planning guidance and proposals for the local government performance framework all offered opportunities to get greater action on climate change.206 The South East Climate Change Partnership said the review offered an opportunity to get regional agencies working more closely together with local authorities.207 The Review says ‘The Government will significantly reform the RDAs’

197 Q110

198 Ev 131

199 Ev 131

200 Ev 139

201 Ev 126

202 Q22

203 Ev 113

204 HMT, Review of sub-national economic development and regeneration, July 2007

205 Ev 111

206 Ev 111

207 Ev 126


objectives, replacing their current tasking framework with a simplified outcome and growth-focused framework defined by a single over-arching growth objective’.208

68. RDAs will in future have their performance assessed solely in terms of economic growth. RDAs will have to have regard to sustainable development objectives, but they will be focused on economic growth. The Environment Agency was concerned that the Sub-National Review reforms focused too narrowly on economic growth. They argued that the primary aim of the Single Regional Strategy should be to achieve sustainable development and that in addition to economic objectives there should be:

• an overarching objective to tackle climate change (especially adaptation);

• a statutory duty for Regional Development Agencies to deliver sustainable development; and

• a requirement for the Comprehensive Area Assessment to track delivery on climate change.209

69. We urge the Government to review how the Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration addresses sustainable development and ensure that the opportunities it offers for improving local and regional co-operation on climate change issues are taken.

Devolved administrations

70. The Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly have the legislative competence to introduce their own policies and measures in devolved areas. But the three devolution settlements are different and each administration has a distinct set of responsibilities, and powers to act, to tackle climate change.210 Indeed in some areas they have set targets that are more ambitious that the national targets; In the Scottish Executive has proposed an 80% emissions reduction target and targets for Scottish renewable generation to account for 31% of whole Scottish electricity demand by 2011, rising to 50% by 2020.211 The UK Climate Change Programme 2006 was developed in partnership with the devolved administrations, which have all set out their own strategies in Scotland’s Climate Change Programme, the One Wales Agreement and the Northern Ireland Sustainable Development Strategy.212 The memoranda submitted to us by the devolved administrations indicated there were few problems in the relationship between them and central Government on the question of climate change. There appears to have been good co-operation with the administrations in Wales and Scotland over the Climate Change Bill and on key areas for joint working, including the EU ETS and the Carbon Reduction Commitment.213 What issues there are appear to be around communication and

208 HMT, Review of sub-national economic development and regeneration, July 2007

209 Ev 142

210 Ev 55

211 Ev 175

212 Ev 56

213 Ev 184


the nature of the devolution settlement. The Scottish Executive said there were a few examples of issues where it was not fully engaged or consulted late by counterparts in central Government.214 They also made the point that under the Scotland Act 1998 the division of responsibility between central Government and the devolved administration was complex. Their scope for action in some areas, like energy policy, was limited by the devolution settlement. They argued that further devolution would make a valuable contribution.

71. We commend the good co-operation between central Government and the devolved administrations on climate change. The Government must maintain the good will that exists in this area is by ensuring it consults the devolved administrations as early as possible on cross-border issues. The Government, in consultation with the devolved administrations, should review the devolution settlements to see if there are any areas where action on climate change is being hampered either by asymmetric devolution or by the way reserved and devolved powers interact.

Adaptation

72. Local authorities have a long standing responsibility to protect their communities from risk. The Environment Agency noted that climate change posed a direct risk to regional agencies, local authorities and devolved administrations and will affect how they exercise their functions and deliver their services.215 The LGA told us work on adaptation is ‘immature’ and lacked a national policy framework.216 The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP)’s evidence supported this saying Defra had not yet promoted significant action on adaptation.217 The Association of British Insurers (ABI) said that greater attention had to be paid to adaptation and noted there was a piecemeal approach to tackling flooding.218 The ABI noted that there was scope for actions on mitigation to aid or complement actions on adaptation. For example, planting forests to sequester carbon could stabilise soils and prevent flooding, rural electrification can support sustainable development and planting trees can help reduce the urban heat-island effect. Building design must tackle better temperature modulation without resorting to an energy dependant system.219 The Wildlife Trusts argued that adaptation needed to be given greater attention and should be given the same priority as mitigation.220 According to Local Government Analysis and Research’s survey:

• only about 15% of councils have included adaptation of their own buildings and facilities in their climate change strategy/policy and about 7% have included adaptation of their own housing stock, the two most popular adaptation elements in relation to councils’ own activities;

214 Ev 177-178

215 Ev 142

216 Ev 3

217 Ev 45

218 Ev 135

219 Ev 136

220 Ev 122


• 62% of councils are developing or intend to produce a climate change strategy or policy;

• 80% of respondents to the LGAR survey said that overall, in their opinion, their local authority had been not very effective, or not at all effective, in adapting to climate change.221

73. The Government needs to clarify the differing roles of regional and local bodies in taking forward work on adaptation.222 A national policy framework that puts in place the necessary resources is needed.223 Effective adaptation strategies need to be tailored to local communities. Action on adaptation and mitigation must be a key element of sustainable community Strategies, LAAs, Local Development Frameworks and other local and regional strategies.224

74. There is currently no statutory duty on councils to take action on adaptation—other than to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas of highest risk. Although from 2008, local authorities will have to report on an adaptation indicator in the new performance framework.225 The Regional Development Agencies said the indicator on adaptation should drive action but only where it is selected.226 UKCIP said it was too early to say how effective the new adaptation indicator would be but it was not likely to be particularly effective unless taken up as part of the 35 indicators for local target setting within Local Area Agreements.227 The Wildlife Trusts also welcomed the climate change adaptation indicator within the local government performance framework but noted it was a process target for producing adaptation strategies; it required complementary outcome targets to make a difference. The indicator on local biodiversity could provide such an outcome, highlighting the performance of Local Wildlife Site systems but only where the two indicators were used together. The climate change adaptation indicator should be seen as an underpinning measure which influences activity in other areas such as planning, transport, waste and water.228 Measuring progress on adaptation will be difficult229 and creating a measurable performance indicator on adaptation remains a challenge.230

75. The UK is a world leader in terms of the kind of support for adaptation available through UKCIP.231 The information available on, for example, local impacts in the


222 Ev 142

223 Ev 19

224 Ev 111


226 Ev 100

227 Ev 46

228 Ev 123

229 Q95

230 Ev 19

231 Q111


UKCIP02 scenarios (soon to be replaced by UKCIP08 scenarios)232 are seen as important.233 However, support for councils in this area is outstripped by the support for mitigation.234 UKCIP argued that more resource was needed to support work on adaptation.235 Central Government has a role to play in supporting the development and implementation of adaptation strategies.236 UKCIP is not sufficiently staffed to provide the kind of support on adaptation that is available on mitigation through the Carbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust. There is a need to increase support at national and regional level for adaptation and to integrate it more closely with mitigation.237

76. Phil Woolas said an adaptation framework was to be published and noted the Climate Change Bill would strengthen action on climate change.238 However, Dr Chris West, Director, UK Climate Impacts Programme, said the Government did not see a need for coercion on adaptation because it was something that would benefit the adapter and would therefore be done; people were assuming it was not a problem because they were not required to look at it.239 He set out a number of reasons why adaptation remained invisible to management boards in local authorities. There are other barriers too; the skills and knowledge of staff, a lack of focus on adaptation in decisions on procurement or building plans and the short-term nature of decision making in local government that does not look at costs over the whole life-cycle of an investment.

77. Adaptation must be a higher priority. We are concerned that adaptation has been treated as the poor relation of work on mitigation and not nearly enough attention has been paid to it. The Government must accelerate plans to bring forward the national adaptation framework and then ensure that adaptation is properly reflected in the work of local, regional and devolved government across the UK.

5 Conclusion 78. Overall we are encouraged by the efforts that the Government has made to raise the profile of the need to address climate change at the different levels of government in the UK. It has put in place a number of changes that should bring about a step change in the level of activity at a local or regional level. It clearly has an effective dialogue with the devolved administrations on climate change issues. However, it is too early to say whether changes to the policy and performance framework will bring about change on the scale that is needed; the Government will need to monitor activity closely and must be ready to intervene early if it looks like insufficient progress in being made. Work will need to continue on the Sub-National Review. There have been significant changes for local authorities and the Government will need to continue its efforts to build skills and


233 Ev 107

234 Ev 3

235 Ev 45

236 Ev 128

237 Ev 128

238 Q141 [Woolas]

239 Q107


knowledge in local government so that they can meet the aspirations set for them by the Government. Setting baselines and targets will be challenging but is crucial if the changes to the performance management framework in England are to deliver the step change in the level of activity that is needed. A great deal is said about spreading best practice but there will be a real challenge in making this relevant to local experience. Above all Government must ensure that this agenda is about real change.

Conclusions and recommendations

1. It is vital that local, regional and devolved government have a clear understanding of their role in tackling climate change. We commend the work the Government has done in collaboration with the devolved administrations. We recognise that the Local Government Association’s Commission on Climate Change has helped to raise the profile of climate change and has made some important recommendations. However, central Government has a duty to co-ordinate how the different spheres of government in the UK interact and to integrate, within the context of devolution and localism, action on the issue of climate change. (Paragraph 5)

2. Procurement, housing, transport and adaptation are obviously areas where local authorities could expect to make significant progress but how these are balanced will depend on local circumstances. The Government made clear its national priorities in the Comprehensive Spending Review and has put real effort into cascading these to local government through Government Offices and the guidance it has produced. The selection of priorities by local authorities will be determined by their scope for action and any particular competency they have. But it is important that efforts to spread best practice and to provide advice and guidance draw their examples from the agreed priorities. (Paragraph 6)

3. Local, regional and devolved government will never be successful in overcoming barriers to progress on climate change if they lack the motivation to take action or the barriers they face are too high. External inspection, audit and challenge will undoubtedly play an important part in providing motivation, as will changes to the policy and performance management frameworks. The Government must look carefully at the incentives and encouragements it can offer to local, regional and devolved government and the steps it can take to help them overcome barriers to action. (Paragraph 11)

4. We believe that local and regional government has in the past faced contradictions in national policy on climate change. Some problems with cross-government policy co-ordination remain; there are tensions between regional airport expansion and the need to limit emissions from aviation; it is not clear how the targets to build more homes will be compatible with efforts to lower emissions; increased road building and lack of a national strategy on road pricing are incompatible with the need to reduce emissions from road transport; it is unclear how district renewable energy and district heating are to be taken into account. (Paragraph 17)

5. The Climate Change Bill will help but the Government must minimise the inconsistencies between policies and ensure departments across Whitehall have a


joined up approach to climate change. Government must also provide clear advice and help local, regional and devolved government understand how tensions in policy are to be reconciled, particularly how economic growth and sustainable development are to be prioritised. Economic and environmental policies must be integrated if we are to successfully move to a low-carbon economy. (Paragraph 18)

6. Climate change is an area where one might expect to see priorities for local government being set nationally. Targets can be justified for local government on issues of national or international importance that may not be driving local priorities. All local authorities should be obliged to include the climate change indicators in their Local Area Agreements, either as negotiated targets or as voluntary targets. (Paragraph 21)

7. Whether or not a local authority has included the climate change indicators in its LAA, thinking about actions to reduce emissions and to adapt to the likely changes in climate should be part of the warp and weft of decision making in local authorities. The Government must make sure that local authorities are acting to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change across their full range of activities, and that the introduction of the indicators does not compartmentalise thinking about these issues. It is not just actions taken specifically in relation to the climate change indicators that have a role to play in reducing emissions or adapting to climate change. What is important is making sure that local authorities are considering the need to reduce emissions and to adapt to climate change in all of their investment and development plans. (Paragraph 26)

8. The assurance that the new performance framework is delivering will come from the independent Comprehensive Area Assessments carried out by the Audit Commission and other local inspectorates. We commend the work done by the Audit Commission and its partners to develop the framework for inspection. The Government must ensure that this work is adequately resourced and that the Audit Commission and the other inspectorates are able to recruit and develop the skills and expertise they will need. (Paragraph 28)

9. We would expect that where the climate change indicators on reducing CO2 are included in a Local Area Agreement they will be accompanied by improvement targets that would be in line with, or run ahead of, national targets. It is important that targets are based on good data. Baselines will need to be set carefully. Targets for the adaptation indicator are much more difficult to construct; the indicator is about planning to adapt rather than measuring an outcome. The Government will need to help local authorities develop appropriate targets on adaptation. (Paragraph 35)

10. We are encouraged that many of those who have set targets have demonstrated clear leadership and set targets that are more ambitious than the national targets. We understand the concerns the Government has about disaggregating national targets. The Committee on Climate Change will need to assess whether the sum of all the different spatial and sectoral approaches puts the UK on track to meet its targets for reducing emissions. If national targets are not disaggregated they should at least inform local target setting; regional government has a particular role to play in


ensuring that local targets take account of both local factors and national targets. (Paragraph 36)

11. The Government should ensure that local, regional and devolved governments are aware of the range of targets beyond those on emissions and adaptation that action on climate change supports, like for example indicators on biodiversity, energy and energy efficiency. (Paragraph 37)

12. The Nottingham Declaration has been useful in providing a starting point for action by local authorities but these public commitments must be turned into real actions; this must be about more than a framed copy of a declaration hung in the reception area of a council building. Assessment and verification is important and the Government should work with the Nottingham Partners to develop a scheme that combines self-assessment and external verification of actions. The Government and the Audit Commission should examine what role such a scheme could play in assessing the performance of local authorities as part of Comprehensive Area Assessments and therefore what priority should be given to developing some kind of externally verified scheme. (Paragraph 42)

13. We acknowledge the impact and contribution ‘wilful individuals’ have made and they have a role to play still in championing the issue. But mainstreaming action on climate change must be more than this; it must get beyond ‘wilful individuals’ if it is to bring about the step change in the level of activity that is needed. (Paragraph 44)

14. The Government must ensure policies, like the Carbon Reduction Commitment, make a difference to the way climate change is handled in local government so that it becomes an issue that engages the political leaders and senior officials and not just the band of ‘wilful individuals’ in environment teams. (Paragraph 46)

15. The Government should consider what part carbon impact assessments should play in local, regional and devolved government. It should assess what support would be needed to allow carbon impact assessments to play a central role in local, regional and devolved government decision and policy making process and then issue guidance to encourage their use. It must also look at the extent to which the organisation of budgets and funding streams is a barrier to a whole-life costing approach. (Paragraph 47)

16. We believe that the current approach to a statutory power to tackle climate change is correct. There are already powers for local government that permit action and the lack of a statutory duty does not seem to be holding back the more innovative local authorities. The Government should examine carefully the case for improving the statutory underpinning for action on climate change; each new bill should be examined to see what scope there is for requirements on local, regional and devolved government to be inserted in order to focus attention and increase activity. The Government should be ready to intervene early if there are any indications that the steps it has taken are not delivering the kind of change in the level of activity on climate change that is needed. (Paragraph 51)

17. There is a difference between a discretionary power, like the well-being powers introduced by the Local Government Act 2000, which allows a council to take some


action, and a statutory duty that forces them to take some action. With discretionary powers advice, guidance and action to spread best practice become crucial. The poor take up of the well-being powers shows there are lessons to be leaned from their introduction and welcome the fact that guidance will be published shortly following on from an evaluation of them. The Government should take steps to encourage councils to use the powers available to them creatively and innovatively to reduce emissions and drive forward work on adaptation. (Paragraph 55)

18. Building skills and knowledge in local and regional government is key. There is a real risk that, if the changes in the performance management and policy frameworks deliver a step-change in activity, the bodies providing support could be overwhelmed by demand. The Government should review the level of support available and ensure that action is taken to address any gaps in skills, including identifying how this extra support and action to address gaps in skills is to be funded. This will be vital in the priority areas identified by the LGA’s Commission on Climate Change. (Paragraph 61)

19. Regional co-ordination is important and the Government must ensure that the different players are all clear about their respective roles. We believe that as well as co-ordinating action on climate change between the different spheres of government in the UK, it is important that there is a joined up approach between local, regional and devolved government and other public service provision. (Paragraph 66)

20. We urge the Government to review how the Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration addresses sustainable development and ensure that the opportunities it offers for improving local and regional co-operation on climate change issues are taken. (Paragraph 69)

21. We commend the good co-operation between central Government and the devolved administrations on climate change. The Government must maintain the good will that exists in this area is by ensuring it consults the devolved administrations as early as possible on cross-border issues. The Government, in consultation with the devolved administrations, should review the devolution settlements to see if there are any areas where action on climate change is being hampered either by asymmetric devolution or by the way reserved and devolved powers interact. (Paragraph 71)

22. Adaptation must be a higher priority. We are concerned that adaptation has been treated as the poor relation of work on mitigation and not nearly enough attention has been paid to it. The Government must accelerate plans to bring forward the national adaptation framework and then ensure that adaptation is properly reflected in the work of local, regional and devolved government across the UK. (Paragraph 77)


Formal Minutes

Tuesday 8 July 2008

Members present

Mr Tim Yeo, in the Chair

Mr Martin Caton Colin Challen Mr David Chaytor Mr Liddell-Grainger

Mr Graham Stuart Jo Swinson Dr Desmond Turner

Climate change and local, regional and devolved government

The Committee considered this matter.

Draft Report (Climate change and local, regional and devolved government), proposed by the Chairman, brought up and read.

Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraphs 1 to 78 read and agreed to.

Summary agreed to.

Resolved, That the Report be the Eighth Report of the Committee to the House.

Ordered, That the Chairman make the Report to the House.

Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for printing with the Report.

Written evidence was ordered to be reported to the House for placing in the Library and Parliamentary Archives.

Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.

[Adjourned till Wednesday 9 July 2008 at 3.15pm


Witnesses

Tuesday 15 January 2008 Page

Professor John Chesshire OBE, Chairman of the Climate Change Commission, Councillor Paul Bettison, Chairman of the Local Government Association Environment Board, and Philip Mind, Senior Policy Consultant, Local Government Association Ev 5

Tuesday 22 January 2008

Christine Seaward, Environment Futures Manager, Hampshire CountyCouncil, Bob Fiddik, Sustainability Manager, Southwark Council and Hilary Knox, Deputy Director, Association of North East Councils Ev 32

Lewis Morrison, Head of Community Advice, Energy Saving Trust, Steve Waller, Sustainability Advisor, Improvement and Development Agency forLocal Government, and Dr Chris West, Director, UK Climate Impacts Programme Ev 47

Wednesday 2 April 2008

Phil Woolas MP, Minister of Sate (Environment), Mr James Hughes, Head of Climate and Energy: Strategy and Public Sector, Department for theEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs, Iain Wright MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State and Andrew Campbell, Director of Local Strategic Partnerships and Performance, Department of Communities and Local Government

Ev 75

List of written evidence

1 Hampshire County Council Ev 18

2 The Nappy Alliance Ev 88

3 Scotland & Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research (SNIFFER) Ev 89

4 Environmental Services Association Ev 91

5 Salix Finance Ltd Ev 92

6 North West Regional Development Agency Ev 93

7 Regional Development Agencies Ev 96

8 East of England Development Agency Ev 102

9 Groundwork UK Ev 109

10 WWF Ev 113

11 Energy Saving Trust Ev 42

12 Energy Retail Association Ev 119

13 The Wildlife Trusts Ev 121


14 South East Climate Change Partnership Ev 125

15 Micropower Council Ev 130

16 UK Climate Impacts Programme Ev 44

17 Association of North East Councils Ev 23

18 Green Alliance Ev 132

19 Association of British Insurers Ev 135

20 Waste and Resources Action Programme Ev 136

21 eaga plc Ev 138

22 London Borough of Southwark Ev 20

23 Local Government Association Ev 1: Ev 17

24 Nottingham Declaration Partnership Ev 140

25 Environment Agency Ev 142

26 Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders Limited Ev 152

27 Renewable Energy Association Ev 154

28 City of London Ev 155

29 Defra Ev 55

30 Association for the Conservation of Energy Ev 159

31 Warwickshire County Council Ev 170

32 Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland) Ev 173

33 Scottish Government—from Minister for Transport, Infrastructure & Climate Change Ev 175

34 Welsh Assembly Government Ev 182

List of unprinted evidence

The following memoranda have been reported to the House, but to save printing costs they have not been printed and copies have been placed in the House of Commons Library, where they may be inspected by Members. Other copies are in the Parliamentary Archives, and are available to the public for inspection. Requests for inspection should be addressed to The Parliamentary Archives, Houses of Parliament, London SW1A 0PW (tel. 020 7219 3074). Opening hours are from 9.30 am to 5.00 pm on Mondays to Fridays.

Calor Gas Ltd


List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament

The reference number of the Government’s response to each Report is printed in brackets after the HC printing number.

Session 2007–08

First Report Are biofuels sustainable? HC 76-I & -II (HC 528)

Second Report Reducing Carbon Emissions from UK Business: The Role of the Climate Change Levy and Agreements

HC 354 (HC 590)

Third Report The 2007 Pre-Budget Report and Comprehensive Spending Review: An environmental analysis

HC 149-I & -II (HC 591)

Fourth Report Are Biofuels Sustainable? The Government Response HC 528 (HC 644)

Fifth Report Personal Carbon Trading HC 565

Sixth Report Reaching an international agreement on climate change

HC 355

Seventh Report Making Government operations more sustainable: A progress report

HC 529

Eight Report Climate change and local, regional and devolved government

HC 225

Ninth Report Carbon capture and storage HC 654

Tenth Report Vehicle Excise Duty HC 907

Session 2006–07

First Report The UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment HC 77 (HC 848)

Second Report The EU Emissions Trading Scheme: Lessons for the Future

HC 70 (HC 1072)

Third Report Regulatory Impact Assessments and Policy Appraisal HC 353 (HC 849)

Fourth Report Pre-Budget 2006 and the Stern Review HC 227 (HC 739)

Fifth Report Trade, Development and Environment: The Role of FCO

HC 289 (HC 1046)

Sixth Report Voluntary Carbon Offset Market HC 331 (HC 418)

Seventh Report Beyond Stern: From the Climate Change Programme Review to the Draft Climate Change Bill

HC 460 (HC 1110)

Eighth Report Emissions Trading: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report of Session 2006–07 on the EU ETS

HC 1072

Ninth Report The Structure of Government and the challenge of climate change

HC 740 (HC 276)


Session 2005–06

First Report Greening Government: the 2004 Sustainable Development in Government Report

HC 698

Second Report Sustainable Timber HC 607 (HC 1078)

Third Report Sustainable Procurement: the Way Forward HC 740

Fourth Report Pre-Budget 2005: Tax, economic analysis, and climate change

HC 882 (HC 195)

Fifth Report Sustainable Housing: A follow-up report HC 779

Sixth Report Keeping the lights on: Nuclear, Renewables, and Climate Change

HC 584 (HC 196)

Seventh Report Sustainable Development Reporting by Government Departments

HC 1322 (HC 1681)

Eighth Report Proposals for a draft Marine Bill HC 1323 (HC 1682)

Ninth Report Reducing Carbon Emissions from Transport HC 981

Tenth Report Trade, Development and Environment: The Role of DFID

HC 1014 (HC 197)

Eleventh Report Outflanked: The World Trade Organisation, International Trade and Sustainable Development

HC 1455 (HC 354)

Twelfth Report Transport Emissions: Government Response to the Committee’s Ninth Report of Session 2005–06 on Reducing Carbon Emissions from Transport

HC 1718

Environmental Audit Committee: Evidence Ev 1

Oral evidence

Taken before the Environmental Audit Committee

on Tuesday 15 January 2008

Members present

Mr Tim Yeo, Chairman

Mr Martin Caton Mark LazarowiczColin Challen Jo SwinsonMr David Chaytor Joan WalleyMartin Horwood

Memorandum submitted by the Local Government Association

1. While climate change aVects the whole world it is only by taking local action that we can best helpdefeat it. Local government has a pivotal role in leading this action in both reducing carbon emissions andpreparing the local area for the potentially devastating eVects of a changing climate.

2. Many councils are leading the way in responding to climate change. For example, Merton Council onthe provision of renewable energy, Kirklees on domestic energy eYciency, Hampshire County Council onadaptation and Nottingham City Council on sustainable transport.

3. The independent Climate Change Commission delivered its report last month, with recommendationson how councils can best tackle climate change. The LGA will be making climate change a major priority in2008 and we will continue to help councils lead the way in helping the UK meet its carbon reduction targets.

4. In the last year there have been significant changes to the way local authorities are encouraged to tackleclimate change and how their performance will be judged. It is too early to say what impact these have hadon work on the ground.

5. Councils will need the support of national government if they are going to eVectively tackle climatechange. The government needs to recognise the role councils play in engaging their communities to help stopclimate change and remove key barriers to local action. Developing the skills and capacity of localgovernment to improve their response to climate change is key.

Background

Local government is uniquely placed to tackle climate change—both mitigation (cutting emissions) andadaptation (preparing for the worst). Councils help reduce carbon emissions and manage the risks of climatechange in five ways:

— By leading action in their communities through example. Councils can take action in theirbuildings, transport fleets and as a housing provider to reduce energy usage, use energy moreeYciently and use renewable energy sources. Kirklees council are investing in the energy eYciencyof the area’s entire housing stock (see Annex A).

— Through service delivery. Councils in England have a procurement budget of around £50 billionper annum. There are some obvious opportunities in the procurement of buildings, transport,goods and services to reduce carbon emissions. For example, to buy or lease energy eYcientvehicles and other energy eYcient products. Westminster City Council has installed over 50 electricvehicle charging points into council car parks. West Sussex County Council have written carbonmanagement into contract specifications (see Annex A).

— By regulating for a low carbon economy—councils can use their building control and planningpowers to reduce carbon emissions. Merton Council led the way a few years ago requiring all non-residential developments to secure 10% of their energy from renewable sources and now 166 othercouncils are looking at implementing the “Merton rule”. Uttlesford Council requires homeownersto take cost eVective energy eYciency measures as a condition of planning consent for homeextensions (see Annex A).

— By making Local Area Agreements with other local bodies to work together to tackle climatechange.

— By helping communities assess and guard against the major risks of a changing climate andmaintaining services during emergencies. Hampshire County Council has held a commission ofinquiry into the impact of climate change for the county (see Annex A).

Ev 2 Environmental Audit Committee: Evidence

There are a number of councils that have led the way in acting on climate change and have developedinnovative approaches that have been adopted by other councils. Over 280 councils have now signed theNottingham Declaration on climate change with the council leader and chief executive giving top levelcommitment to put in place strategies to tackle both mitigation and adaptation. There is a growingrecognition within local government that climate change needs a systematic, consistent and urgent responsefrom all councils.

LGA Response to the Committee’s Questions

How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government and devolvedadministrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areas like wasteand transport? What funding, powers, and structures are required to improve joined up delivery of climatechange policy at all levels of government?

1. There are a number of ways in which the LGA’s Climate Change Commission has suggested thatcentral government could support local action more eVectively. These include:

— First, by ensuring that all levels of government, all departments and the public sector considerclimate change in all policy development and action, for example, through carbon impact tests.

— Second, by ensuring that opportunities aVorded by the legislative programme are taken tostrengthen the statutory underpinning for local government action.

— Third, by reviewing the quality and level of support available to local councils to tackle climatechange and supporting local government to develop a suite of interventions, such as peer reviewsand leadership training, to help drive improvement in local government and the wider publicsector.

— Fourth, working with the regional development agencies, and skills bodies, to identify the skillsgaps that are constraining local action and to take action to close them. There is, for example, ashortage of skilled energy managers in the public sector.

— Fifth, working with the LGA, CIPFA, Audit Commission and National Audit OYce to introducea whole-life cycle costing approach into procurement practices that takes account of the costs ofcarbon and overcomes the tension with short-term financial eYciency.

Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can the accountabilityand transparency of the response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?

1. It is not yet clear how the targets in the Climate Change Bill will be delivered and what contributioncould be made by diVerent sectors. There needs to be flexibility in what can be delivered at the local level.

2. All councils will be required to report on the reduction of carbon emissions relating to both their estateand the local area as part of the CAA. The same level of accountability and transparency should apply acrossthe public sector.

3. In many areas councils are co-ordinating their response to climate change. The Association of NorthEast Councils has set up a council member led group on climate change to work collectively andcollaboratively to tackle climate change.

4. Over 280 councils have signed the Nottingham Declaration which has been highly eVective atmobilising council’s commitment to tackling climate change. The LGA is calling on all councils to sign thedeclaration or make an equivalent commitment. The LGA, as part of the Nottingham DeclarationPartnership, is also proposing an accreditation scheme where councils would provide evidence todemonstrate their action on climate change. The partnership is talking to the Audit Commission about howsuch a scheme could complement the Comprehensive Area Assessment.

What, if anything, needs to be changed in the framework governing the actions of devolved administrations,regional government and local authorities? For example, does there need to be a more explicit reference toclimate change in the local government performance framework and will the new performance indicators onclimate change be enough to stimulate action?

1. In the last year there have been significant changes to the way local authorities are encouraged to tackleclimate change and how their performance is to be judged. These include new indicators for theComprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) on climate change; the Carbon Reduction Commitment, amandatory cap and trade emissions trading scheme that will apply to larger authorities; and the EnergyMeasures Report which councils must “have regard to” in exercising their functions.

2. The Audit Commission has said that it will place much more emphasis on sustainability as long-termvalue for money requires the sustainable use of resources. They are also consulting on how a council dealswith climate change will be considered in its “Use of Resources Assessment”.


3. It is too early to judge the impact of the new performance indicators and the approach to the CAAtaken by the Audit Commission. This change will require it to develop its capacity to make judgements onissues of sustainability. Other agencies, such as government oYces and the Environment Agency will alsoneed to improve their capacity to engage with local strategic partnerships on climate change.

To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland will set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanUK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030, fittogether with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions, and the impact of carbon reduction policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

1. Sir Simon Milton, chair of the Local Government Association, has called on every council to haveclimate change targets at the core of their local area agreements. He emphasised their choice about how theytackle climate change, but they should make it central to what they do.

2. Targets should be set at the local level by bringing together the public, private and voluntary sectorsin Local Strategic Partnerships. They need to be evidence based and tailored to local conditions—we couldnot support a crude disaggregation of national targets. The LGA does however support the national targetswhich serve as a guiding ambition for each local area and have already informed local target setting inmany areas.

3. We support the need to develop more sophisticated national data collection where it does not imposenew burdens on local government. There are however a number of technical issues with the current areabased emissions data, in particular, the way in which the data takes account of transport related emissions.

How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climate change?What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are local authorities, regionalgovernment and devolved administrations?

1. It is clear that policy and action on adaptation is relatively immature compared to mitigation. Thereare no national measures or benchmarks of a well adapted organisation or area. Neither is there a nationalpolicy framework on adaptation.

2. It is important therefore that central government place a much greater emphasis on adaptation, andprovide much more support to councils in identifying risk and mapping vulnerabilities. The supportavailable to councils to develop approaches to adaptation is small in contrast to the support available formitigation.

How should the Committee on Climate Change reflect the interests and needs of the diVerent levels ofgovernment across the UK?

1. Given the importance of local action to tackling both mitigation and adaptation, it is essential that theCommittee on Climate Change has a deep understanding and knowledge of the local government role. It isessential that it is able to access local government expertise.

What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do the diVerent levels of government have suYcientpowers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? What policies areworking well?

1. The most significant barrier to local action is skills and capacity. This varies in nature—from a smalldistrict council lacking the oYcer capacity to develop action on climate change to the need to significantlyscale up the sustainable building and energy eYciency skills in the design, planning and constructionindustries—both for new build and to address the energy eYciency of the existing housing stock. It is anissue that applies to other sectors—the economy needs to skill up for a low carbon future.

2. The LGA would therefore like to see a national strategy to identify the skills gaps and specific sectorsand geographical areas. Some work has been done by the DTI (now BERR) with the regional agencies. Butit needs to be expanded and pick up key issues such as developing local energy supply.

What impact will the new Planning Policy Statement on climate change have on emissions reductions and workon adaptation? How are the so called “Merton rules” aVected? How might other planning guidance be changedto reduce emissions?

1. We are pleased that the new Planning and Policy statement embeds at the heart of the planning systema focus on the need to minimise greenhouse gas emissions in new developments and to ensure thatdevelopment decisions reflect risk assessments of the impact of climate change. Critically both are to beassessed together rather than seen as separate issues for planning consideration.


2. Importantly the PPS recognises the role of planning in minimising emissions through encouraging lowcarbon and renewable energy supplies. Locally produced energy and decentralised energy systems are givena specific focus through various provisions in the PPS. The PPS reiterates the central role that councils havein determining the sustainability of their areas and provides for the flexibility for locally determinedapproaches where appropriate and justified.

3. However there needs to be clear guidance from the government that the provision for “testing localrequirements” in paragraph 33 of the PPS does not allow developers to unnecessarily challenge the decisionsof councils.

4. The impact will also be dependent on the capacity within councils to undertake complex assessmentsacross a range of technical areas. We will work with CLG and stakeholders on improving councils capacityto respond to the PPS. It is imperative that all players, including developers and the construction industry,are pro-active in responding positively to the PPS.

Are local authorities meeting their duty to enforce building regulations in relation to environmental measures?Does the enforcement regime discourage non-compliance?

1. The move to place energy eYciency at the heart of the building regulations was widely welcomed.However, whilst the new requirements are relatively immature, there have been problems with the practicalimplementation.

2. There is concern that enforcement of the building control regime, in particular the energy eYciencyrequirements in Part L of the Building Regulations, is not functioning eVectively. This is acknowledged byDCLG who are looking at the future of building control. The LGA is particularly concerned that the currentregulatory regime—with a dual and competitive public and private sector market for building control—isundermining compliance with building standards.

What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central government support forsharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, Salix Finance, theCarbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust play in providing support?

1. There are many examples of local best practice, some are included in annex A. Within localgovernment, the IDEA plays the leading role in both capturing and spreading best practice. The LGA hasworked with the Nottingham Declaration Partnership, the Energy Saving Trust, IDEA and Carbon Trustto provide practical support and advice to councils.

2. Many local authorities are working very successfully with the agencies the committee lists. But thesupport could be more eVectively targeted on councils that would like to raise their performance on climatechange, and that for “entry” level councils there was a need for a simple one-stop shop oVer. There is alsoa concern that as councils place more emphasis on climate change that the available support would be overstretched.

8 January 2008

Annex A

BEST PRACTICE EXAMPLES

Kirklees Council

Kirklees Council’s new Warm Zone Plus was set up in 2007. It oVers all homes the opportunity to haveloft and cavity wall insulation installed free on a systematic, house by house basis. Contact is by a personalvisit oVering energy eYciency advice, low cost insulation and grant aided measures.

Over the three years of the programme, the council expects more than 40,000 homes to install energyeYciency measures under the first scheme in the country to oVer all households in one area free insultation.Warm Zone Plus which will cost £21 million over three years is being funded through capital borrowing(using prudential borrowing powers) with the interest paid from revenue. This is being supplemented byfunds from Warm Front and CERT.

Warm Front Plus builds on many years of targeted energy eYciency work. Kirklees has around 26% ofits population aVected by fuel poverty (ie people who have to spend more than 10% of their gross incomeon fuel to keep their home adequately warm). The council has therefore run a variety of schemes over anumber of years including Keep Warm and Warm Homes Kirklees to help raise home energy eYciencylevels.

In April 2008 Kirklees Council will be launching a £3 million scheme to promote householder renewables.The principal barriers to the uptake of renewables by homeowners is cost, confidence in the technology, itscapabilities and how it is installed. The scheme aims to address these barriers.


Private householders will be able to install up to £10,000 of renewable technology on their homes and payfor it when their home is sold via a second charge on the property. The scheme is funded through capitalborrowing. Kirklees Council will administer the scheme providing tendered prices from approved installers.Once the property is sold and the original loan recovered it will be recycled into a revolving loan fund. It isexpected that this relatively simple scheme will attract additional finance from energy suppliers through theCarbon Emissions Reduction Target scheme.

The RE-Charge scheme is one of the schemes which will demonstrate action to reduce household carbonemissions as part of the Council’s action plan to address carbon emissions targets in the new LocalGovernment Performance Framework along with the Warm Zone Plus scheme.

Uttlesford District Council

Uttlesford District Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on home extensions is an example ofhow the planning system can be used to reduce carbon emissions from existing homes.

The SPD requires cost eVective energy eYciency measures to be carried out throughout the existingbuilding as a condition of planning consent for a home extension.

The installation of energy eYciency measures is designed to: mitigate the additional energy requirementsthat result from the house being extended; help reduce the household’s energy consumption; and reduceenergy bills and improve comfort levels. The scheme was designed by the councils’ building control andplanning functions.

West Sussex County Council

Tendering for new service partners is an ideal opportunity to engage your supply chain in achieving yourcarbon and wider sustainability goals. A recent tender for the provision of managed desktop services byWest Sussex County Council required all tendering parties to, “demonstrate their carbon management plansin respect of services being provided to the Council”. The Council shared their goals and the Council’sSustainability Action Plan, inviting potential partners both to innovate and to demonstrate theircommitment to the low carbon agenda.

Hampshire County Council

Hampshire County Council signed the Nottingham Declaration in 2001 and was a pilot in Councils forClimate Protection and the Carbon Management Programme. It was a founder member of the South EastClimate Change Partnership, leads the ESPACE European project, part of the Advisory Group to the EUon adaptation to climate change, and a founder signatory to the Aalborg Commitments in 2004. In 2006the Council adopted the vision “within a decade Hampshire will prosper without risking our environment”.

Recognising that climate change is probably the biggest threat to achieving that vision, a Climate ChangeCommission of Inquiry (COI) was established with commissioners drawn from business, academia, mediaand councillors from all the political parties on the County Council.

Four themed hearings were held between May and September 2007, where evidence was presented byexternal experts, and key findings were agreed by commissioners. A meeting of the Council considered areport and recommendations at the end of November.

Witnesses: Professor John Chesshire OBE, Chairman of the Climate Change Commission, Councillor PaulBettison, Chairman of the Local Government Association Environment Board, and Mr Philip Mind, SeniorPolicy Consultant, Local Government Association, gave evidence.

Q1 Chairman: Good morning. First of all, myprofuse apologies that you have been waitingoutside. Our private session went on much longerthan we anticipated. I understand that Paul Bettisonis on his way. As we are running a bit behind time, Ithink we will crack on straight away. We know whoyou are, so perhaps we could skip introductions.Could I start by asking you why the Commission—whose report obviously we have now seen and havehopefully absorbed—chose the five major areas thatit did as the key priorities?Professor Chesshire: Good morning, Chairman andothers. Could I say, first of all, that I am delightedpersonally that you are undertaking this inquirybecause the more momentum we can build up in this

area the better, I think. Before I answer that specificquestion, we focused a lot on the general frameworkreally: how could we seek assurance that there wouldbe a positive local government response, was thatcoming from local government itself, by the variousroutes we have suggested, and to what extent was itdependent upon more eVective collaborationbetween central and local government and reform ofthe strategy process? But, to illustrate some of theissues, we then chose the five areas, that is quiteright. Adaptation was chosen because, from theevidence we received, much less progress was beingmade on adaptation. I will not say hardly any at all,because momentum was building up during lastyear, partly in response to the floods and the flood


15 January 2008 Professor John Chesshire OBE, Councillor Paul Bettison and Mr Philip Mind

inquiry and measures from Brussels and so on, butthat is an ill-formed area of policy, I think, bothcentrally and locally, and was one we anticipatedbefore the floods occurred. We thought that was anexposed Achilles’ heel that needed urgent attention.In terms of some of the other areas: transport andhousing were the two largest single areas ofemissions and were chosen for that reason becausewe had some expertise; planning because we arelooking long term, as it were, at how do we “green”the built infrastructure within local government andvia its leaders on the wider community; procurementbecause I think there was concern that there mightbe a response from local government that it had noincremental resources to drive the agenda forward,so procurement and the fuel poverty agenda weretwo areas on which we wanted to focus. Perhaps Imight add just one more thing on procurement. Ithink procurement has been studied by others. Mypersonal impression, as Chairman, is that the bitsare still on the garage floor: we do not have a vehicleto drive out, so there is need for more attention. Iwould emphasise its scale and its weight, toconclude, Chairman. Procurement per se is about£50 billion per year and capital spend is about £17billion per year. Rounding those up to £70 billionover 20 years, we are talking about one year’s UKGDP. If one uses the role of local government,through local strategic partnerships and so on, toengage with the police, education, fire, health, otherpublic sector players, we might be talking about twoyears’ GDP through procurement over a 20-yearperiod. That is beginning to have a major footprint,we think, on green supply chains. Those were someof the reasons.

Q2 Chairman: Do you think that local authoritieshave enough discretion to make a diVerence?Professor Chesshire: I think they have the discretionbut they do not have the motivation. They do notalways have the expertise or the resources generally.Clearly, from my experience evaluating Beaconcouncils two years ago, where local authorities haveseized the initiative in this area—and I do not wantto keep quoting Woking, but Woking and Leicesterand even unsung heroes like High Peak and theCornwall Strategic Energy Partnership—they havemade quite considerable contributions in specificareas, some in renewables, some in transport, somein the procurement area, but that has not reallypermeated very far and I am still concerned howlong the tail is in local government. That is my majorconcern. This best practice, despite Beacon toolkitsand many other toolkits, does not penetrate veryquickly. My conclusion is there has not been astrategy framework for local government but, also,it is a question of motivation, to be honest. It has notbeen a door-step issue, I am told by manycouncillors, until very recently. Clearly the publicexpenditure settlements and so on mean there is nota vast amount of money for government, so they areconstrained in what they do, but certainly wherelocal government has expressed an interest in thisthey have made rather impressive progress I think.

Q3 Chairman: Where councils are shaping up verywell, and you have mentioned some of them, is thatbecause of the individual interest of either oYcers ormembers of those councils? Is that the primaryreason why some are so far ahead of the others?Professor Chesshire: The evidence we had, certainlyfrom the Centre for Sustainable Energy, suggestedthat it was down to what they called “wilfulindividuals”—the individual oYcer in a transportfunction, a housing function, a renewables functionwho was driving this agenda forward. I think that istrue. But certainly from my Beacon councilexperience I would also complement that by theimportant role of leadership, either from thepolitical leadership of the council or from an activechief executive. I think both bottom-up and top-down can be important, and most eVective whenthey are combined.

Q4 Chairman: We have some that are doing verywell. How do we get to the point where that becomesmuch more widespread mainstream practice?Mr Mind: It is important to put this into context.Most of the action that has taken place so far in theexemplar authorities has been attributed, as Johnhas said, to wilful individuals. We have not had thekind of policy drivers in place that encourage councilaction. A lot will change over the next few years, asa number of policy drivers that have been put inplace at the national level start to be implemented.For the first time, we will have carbon reductionperformance indicators in the performancemanagement framework. The largest localauthorities will be subject to a carbon tradingregime. We have a sustainable energy measuresreport which brings together best practice. There area number of things which are happening now,therefore, which will encourage local action.

Q5 Chairman: Paul, welcome. I gather you have hadsome trouble getting here.Councillor Bettison: Yes. Thank you.Chairman: We have not been going as long as youmight have feared because we were somewhatdelayed ourselves. We are delighted to see you. Wehave just opened the session really.

Q6 Joan Walley: You mentioned just now aboutleadership and how this whole issue gets translatedinto local action. Perhaps I could take that down tothe housing policies that local authorities have.What do you feel the main action that localauthorities should be taking on housing should be?How do you distinguish between council housingand between the whole housing sector, betweenmanagements. How do you feel that a real diVerencecan be made as far as the housing sector and thehousing functions of local authorities?Professor Chesshire: I agree it is a critical sector. Myexpertise is not particularly strong in housing. Myother colleagues might want to come in. One areaover which I have been very concerned over three orfour years—and not just wearing this hat, in thisrole—is the issue of compliance. The problem of thehousing sector, I think, is that of sloppy standards



and poor training and lack of skill on site, as it were,so that, even when you have fairly tightspecifications for the envelope of the building,experience suggests that they are not always put upto those tight specifications. As we are going to placegreater demands on the construction sector toimprove its thermal eYciency, to lower its carbonfootprint, to familiarise itself with a range ofrenewables and low carbon technologies, unless weget compliance right we are going to start missing alot of opportunities, because, as the housingconstruction rate increases, we are going to be leftwith opportunities which we could have taken at avery low cost which if we have to go back in, say, 20years time to retrofit will be extraordinarilyexpensive. I regarded that really as a kind of leading-edge indicator of the role the local government canhave. I realise competition was introduced in thesefunctions and, in my own personal view, it wascompetition downwards rather than competitionupwards, so I would want to emphasise the role ofbuilding control. In other areas, I would think in theplanning function, for example, it is going to becrucially important to ensure the use of access topublic transport in new housing developments—thisplaces an emphasis on brownfield developmentsrather than greenfield developments—and, also, ofcourse, the extension of rules like the Merton rule todomestic and not just non domestic properties.There is a very wide agenda.

Q7 Joan Walley: We would like to press you a littlebit more on the building control and planningaspects of it, but, just dealing with the housingfunctions specifically that the local authorities have,you are talking about non-compliance presumablyin relation to the construction of new properties butthere are whole programmes going on, with WarmFront, with Warm Zone, with insulation. How doyou feel that achieving greater energy eYciency incarbon reduction is being hindered at the moment?Professor Chesshire: That topic is close to my heart.I do see this as a rather crucial area but also onewhere very significant resources are alreadyavailable and will become available. We were a bitdisappointed—wearing my Fuel Poverty AdvisoryGroup hat—with the funding from centralgovernment for Warm Front, which is going to falla little bit. But, as you may well know, through theEnergy EYciency Commitment but particularlythrough the Carbon Emission Reduction Targetwhich comes in on 1 April next year,1 with £1 billiona year for CERT and £300 million a year for WarmFront and Decent Homes and one or two otherthings on top, we are talking about the best part of£1500 million a year probably over each of the nextthree years. I regard that as a major opportunity tobegin to improve the energy eYciency of the housingstock, particularly addressing it towards the fuelpoor, because I think there is a tension, as theCommittee will know, between rising energy pricesand the impressive impact those have on thosesuVering from fuel poverty.

1 Note by Witness: The Carbon Emission Reduction Targetwill come in on 1 April 2008.

Q8 Joan Walley: Do you feel that the reduction thereis in the Warm Front money is linked with the extramoney that is coming through? Do you feel that theextra money that is coming through from the othersources is more than compensating for the changesin the Warm Front scheme? Do you feel there isenough co-operation on the ground between thesediVerent schemes?Professor Chesshire: I must answer the first part ofyour question wearing my Fuel Poverty AdvisoryGroup hat, I think. No, I am very disappointed thatgovernment has chosen to reduce governmentsupport, public expenditure, to fuel poverty whenthere was a firm statutory framework in place toremove the vulnerable from fuel poverty in 2010 andall others by 2016 as far as reasonably practical. Itcertainly seems to me in the Fuel Poverty AdvisoryGroup that was not reasonably practical. They hadnot applied the tests. Certainly recent statements inthe House by the relevant minister almost evadedreference to the 2010 vulnerable target whichgovernment has.

Q9 Joan Walley: Do you think that the 2010 targetcan be met?Professor Chesshire: I do not think so, with the sumsof money now available, and the fact that energyprices have risen considerably last year and are likelyto rise this year from the point of view of mostcommentators. In terms of co-ordination, we willcome back to the local government Climate ChangeCommission. We did make some proposals—frommemory at pages 32 to 33 of the report, in the greenboxes—on ways in which local authorities andRegistered Social Landlords (RSLs) could workmore closely with energy suppliers to maximise thetake-up of energy eYciency measures.

Q10 Joan Walley: Your report says that all councilsshould contribute to the Home Energy EYciencyDatabase and should have access to energyperformance certificates in their area so that they canbuild up a better picture of energy eYciency of localhousing stock. What do you think is preventing thatfrom happening at the moment?Professor Chesshire: Parallel to my work, Iundertook quite a few meetings with CLG, seekingto have access to energy performance certificates forlocal government.

Q11 Joan Walley: CLG is?Professor Chesshire: Communities and LocalGovernment, the former ODPM as was.Communities and Local Government is the leaddepartment on measures of that kind. It seems to methat we need to move towards a 21st centuryDomesday book—I mean, nothing very clever—where we can quickly categorise the housing stock:green because reasonable measures have beenimplemented; amber where some of the basicmeasures have been put in place but there is scopefor more activity; and red where a property was indire need of refurbishment or application of cavity



and loft insulation or more eYcient appliances. Thatis a fairly simple kind of measure. The reason that isso important strategically is that all of the evidencefrom BERR and Defra is that the “lowest hangingfruit” in terms of pounds of expenditure per carboncapture is in the housing stock. There is a lot of low-hanging fruit there. This was a mechanism I washoping to see developed between Defra and CLG. Itis a case of providing as much information aspossible to local government in standardised form todevelop this Domesday book over time. Also, analternative route would be to use the Energy SavingTrust’s Home Energy EYciency Database. Again,that would require access by local government todata. They need it operationally, do they not, toimplement programmes on the ground?

Q12 Joan Walley: What has happened to stop thatat the moment? Presumably local authorities whichhave taken up energy eYciency carbon issues can dothat themselves at the moment, but you are sayingthat it needs to be done on a national basis for thenational framework.Professor Chesshire: My colleagues from the LGAcan speak with more authority on this point but Ithink that certainly some of the local authoritieswith housing responsibilities are comparativelysmall organisations—you know, district councils. Iknow from my work with the Home EnergyConservation Association (HECA) that very oftenthose are part-time posts, maybe one afternoon aweek, one day a week, one and a half days a week.Those posts are under threat as a result of Defra’sreview of HECA, and I think a consistent concernwe had expressed in the evidence from localgovernment was the need both in qualitative termsand in quantitative terms to improve the humanresource available to tackle this agenda. Some of itis a shortage of oYcers’ time, at a time when thereare a lot of other competing claims, but I would deferto Paul and Philip on that specific point.Councillor Bettison: Of course with a lot of localauthorities having disposed of their stock to RSLs,the former housing department in those authoritiesreverts to being essentially a client role and there arejust no spare bodies around these days. Also, onemust not forget that local authorities themselveshave been incredibly squeezed. I was saying only theother day in my own authority that we now havemany one-person departments, which never used tobe the case. For example, when our “tree person” ison holiday, we are essentially just not in the treebusiness.

Q13 Joan Walley: Finally, do you have anycomments on the Comprehensive Spending Reviewprocess 2008-2011 in respect of the shift that there isof the share of funding? As I understand it, morenow goes to the RSLs, something like 69 per cent, asopposed to local authorities in the past getting thelargest share of that funding. Is that going to haveany bearing on this?

Councillor Bettison: It certainly will do, yes.

Q14 Joan Walley: In what way?Councillor Bettison: Not least of which in terms ofthe provision of oYcers available. Because, as Johnsaid, this sort of thing requires oYcer input. If localauthorities do not have the oYcers, then thelikelihood of them wanting to go out and create newposts against the background of the most constrictedsettlement for some time is most unlikely. I thinkover the next few months we are going to see localauthorities shedding posts rather than creating newones.

Q15 Mr Caton: Could we come back to planningand building control, which you have alreadyreferred to, Professor, and in particular compliance.In your report2, you referred to BRE researchshowing that one-third of new homes failed to meetbuilding regulations. Can you expand on why youthink that is? Also, the Commission’s report raisesconcerns about the regulatory model associated withPart L of building regulations. What needs to changeto ensure we have something nearer 100 per centcompliance and proper enforcement?Professor Chesshire: My personal judgment is thatlocal authorities have taken their eye oV the ball interms of this function. Much more emphasis hasgone to the health and safety aspects of constructionin my view and less weight has been placed on PartL. To be fair to the local authorities, that reflects thefact that, by and large, there were not enormouspressures on them to meet specific carbon targets. Ichair something called the Energy EYciencyPartnership for Homes. We funded BRE on twooccasions—I think four years ago and two yearsago—to undertake fairly modest surveys of newlyconstructed properties. That is the reference thatyou have there. We found a messy picture. It was notjust that roof voids had not been completely filled orbad workmanship on site and missed opportunitiesand so on, but even light fittings had not beeninstalled properly, especially high eYciency lightfittings and so on. We are in the course of negotiatingwith Communities and Local Government to jointlyfund a study of homes via the Partnership over thenext few months, to see to what extent compliancewith Part L (April 2006) is now being met, so we willhave a more sensitised context, I think, both in localauthorities and in the construction industry and soon. I would hope that we can report in July orSeptember, something of that time horizon, to seewhether there has been any learning. As to why thereis not compliance, we are beginning the study I justreferred to with a number of discussions withstakeholders to see if there are underlying reasonswhy they are unable to build, to plan, and are theresome quick wins we can identify, as it were, beforewe go on to measure the exercise itself. I hope thatwill inform us a lot more than the two previousstudies, which were just doing the “pressure testing”survey of houses.

2 http://campaigns.lga.gov.uk/climatechange/home/



Mr Mind: I am not an expert on this but, if you wantchapter and verse, there is an organisation calledLocal Authority Building Control which representsbuilding control inspectors around the country. Oneimportant point to make is that the building controlfunction is not just delivered by local authorities, itis also delivered by the private market, so you havequite an unusual form of regulation where you havea competitive market of provision of inspection, andI think local authority building control, if they werehere, would say that has an impact on the quality ofinspection. I think they would also say, if they werehere, that the Part L requirements are relatively new.There is—and this goes right across action onclimate change—a skills capacity issue, in so far asbuilding control inspectors have had to up-skill inrelation to energy eYciency requirements as theyhave been raised by government.

Q16 Mr Caton: You have already mentioned withapproval the Merton rule. There is quite a bit ofcontroversy at the moment about how theGovernment in its planning policy statement isaddressing what the Merton rule does for thoseauthorities which follow it. Do you think theplanning policy statement, as is, is going to provideMerton on a wider scale?Professor Chesshire: Again, I do not know why therehas been hesitancy in central government on this. Iwould prefer to see scope for innovation. It seems tome that in diVerent areas of the country one hasvastly diVerent opportunities to exploit renewablesand the kinds of renewables one can exploit. Clearly,in rural areas, there are opportunities for ground-source heat pumps and for biomass combustion. Avast number of technologies can be brought to bear.Even wind technology may well perform betteroutside dense urban areas, as all the scientificevidence is suggesting. On the other hand, innerurban local authorities have diVerent opportunities.I am concerned with the impact of lobbying, really,from the construction industry. I see that as being asignificant brake, both on the compliance issue andon debates such as Merton and so on. I appreciatethat the Government, coming under pressure fromthe construction industry, says that there is a needfor some certainty and you should not have diVerentstandards being imposed in diVerent locations; onthe other hand, many of the options are locallydetermined, in my view, and therefore you needinnovation. I would want the planning guidance toprovide a great deal of positive framework and notto be too restrictive, as it were, as to how it is applied.The building industry will just have to learn toinnovate. It is time we used a bit more of the stickand a bit less of the carrot with the constructionsector. That is my personal view.

Q17 Mr Caton: At the moment Merton tends to be10 per cent across the whole authority. TheGovernment seems to be resisting that. How is thatgoing to be resolved? The Government says it isgoing to improve things; others certainly think theyare going to get less of that sort of action.

Councillor Bettison: I have concerns that if Mertonwere to become a site-by-site negotiation it wouldput quite significant strains on planning oYcers,who are in short supply anyway, and that, in turn,would make the planning process less eYcient. Ithink it would also lead in some cases to certaindevelopers doing better than others because theywere able to lean more eVectively on the localauthority. I do not think that is what the essence ofthe Merton rule is. As the professor has indicated,there are diVerent opportunities for renewableenergy sources in diVerent parts of the country, butI am not sure that we are ready to say that there isa diVerent opportunity at one end of the street fromanother or on diVerent sites. I do have concernsabout the deliverability of that in local authorityterms.

Q18 Caton: Do you think more renewable energyapplications could be regarded as permitteddevelopments?Councillor Bettison: You mean in order to speed upthe process? My initial response to that would be yes.I think the LGA would want to look at that a littlemore closely to make sure the law of unintendedconsequence does not arise.

Q19 Mr Caton: I am thinking in particular of micro-generation.Councillor Bettison: Certainly micro-generation,yes.Professor Chesshire: And some roof-mountedpanels and so on, subject to basic standards. I thinkthat is disruptive. I do not want to be too critical oflocal authorities, obviously. There is a whole rangeof technologies becoming available—many of themoversold by particular installers, particularly as totheir output and performance in specific urbancircumstances. I have chaired for the researchcouncils, a group of universities (Imperial,Southampton, Sussex and others), looking at theperformance of wind generators in urban areas, forexample, and their sensitivity to the wind speed:output is the cube of the wind speed. It is incrediblydiYcult to measure, as it were, and that level ofknowledge and expertise has not cascaded down intothe planning system of local authorities as yet. It willdo and quickly. I have one final thing to say, if I may,Chairman, in response to Merton. I would also wantto insist that, before the renewables were taken up,all cost-eVective energy eYciency measures were firstinstalled, because the way you increase the share ofrenewables is by lowering demand for the output ofthose renewables.

Q20 Mr Caton: Do you think local authoritiesshould be free to use planning to encourage higherstandards of energy eYciency than those set out inbuilding regulations?Professor Chesshire: I find it diYcult to speak forlocal government as a whole. I like innovation, anda lot of this is about innovation, of gettingexperience on the ground, of getting skills andlabour forces familiar with it, and what is leadingpractice today will be bog standard, mainstream



practice in five years/ten years’ time and so on. As Isaid at the outset, that is an area where there is a lotof opportunity for cost-eVective, energy eYciencyimprovement. That cost-eVectiveness will beexpanded as we get more technologies developedand so on, and then costs fall. I would have thought,for example, that there may be some localauthorities who would want to emphasise their eco-credentials in particular housing estates orparticularly new industrial estates, for example, or inthe development of schools, and integrated publicprovisions in libraries, schools, swimming pools andso on, where you could even out your heat loads bycombining heat and power and so on. I think therewould be a lot of appetite for that as well, from someparts of the construction sector, to showcase, not atthe Ideal Home Exhibition but on the ground, on amodest or a substantial scale. I cannot see what thedisadvantage of that is, because I think it provides anenormous learning opportunity for everybody.Councillor Bettison: Again, any such innovationwould need to be applied transparently across thepiece rather than attempt to be negotiated site bysite. That is really, if you like, the beauty of theMerton rule and the fact that the council itself, indeveloping that rule, produced such an elegant wayforward. It would not have been the same if it was acase of “where we can manage it, in negotiation”.

Q21 Colin Challen: What are the most eVective wayslocal authorities can address transport emissions?Do you have some examples of good practice?Councillor Bettison: As the professor indicatedearlier, the use of brownfield sites, where often thosesites are within the transport structure, is better thangreenfield sites in that respect. Obviously on thegreenfield sites, one needs to develop additionalroutes and that is not always easy in an environmentwhere you do not have the custom for full buses onday one. It is the same with any new developmentlike that, from scratch, on greenfield sites. It is thesame, of course, with the provision of most services,including schools. Do you open the schools first andrun them mostly empty for a while or do you openthe schools later and then find that the early pupilsoccupying properties have gone out to your existingschools and you then split siblings?Professor Chesshire: I do not think local politiciansare being any braver than national politicians intackling transport. Quite frankly, it is one of thoseareas where you read how every vehicle has twovotes attached to it. Let us be honest, it is theCinderella of both climate change and energyeYciency policy. It has been all the time I have beenin this field—which predates 1973. I think we need torecognise the nervousness with which politicians ofall flavours and at all levels approach tacklingtransport. The thing that can be done in house is tohave staV transport plans. As we emphasised in ourreport, they have 2.1 million employees, so there isa hell of a footprint, particularly for travel in urbanareas—because most oYce buildings tend to be inurban areas, libraries, central facilities run by localgovernments—so encouraging modal shift thereshould not be impossible. One is seeing some best

practice emerging. Again I do not want to citeparticular examples, but I was struck on a Beaconvisit to Nottinghamshire by the Robin Hood lineand so on. That had depended on quite a lot ofpublic support outside the council’s own resourcesbut it had led to a significant modal shift in theNottingham area. I live in Brighton, where they havedecided to ration road space, so that, as you get neartowards the city centre—maybe four miles out–what was a four-lane road becomes a two-lane roadwith bus lanes and we have had a sustained increasein bus transport use of between 15 and 20 per centper year, I think for the last six or seven years. Thereis zoning. There is parking. There is road pricing.There is a whole series of agendas which politicianscan seize locally. There is diVerential in parkingtariVs, adjusted by engine capacities and emissionlevels. There are the snake schemes, for walkingchildren towards schools. There are cycle routes.There are 101 things that local government can do,as I am sure the Committee is aware, but they costquite a lot of money and local government does nothave a lot of money. Philip can give you someexamples of the diVerence between how revenueexpenditure and capital expenditure is treated in thetransport sector. There is one other example I cangive you of crassness, absolute crassness, from theevidence we were given concerning public transportprovision to a new factory space: the traYc islandswere made so tight that you could not negotiate abus around them. That is absolutely absurd. I haveno time for that at all, people taking their eye oV theball in terms of long-term provision and so on.Absolute crassness. But there are some fundingissues with which I am not familiar.Mr Mind: There is a range of measures that councilscan take to reduce transport-related emissions. Wedo not have a hierarchy of being able to say thatcertain measures are more eVective than othermeasures but there is a number of measuresdescribed as “smarter choice measures” or “softmeasures” which encourage people to travel moresustainably. They range from improving cycle paths,to reallocating road space, to visiting householdsand conducting travel planning sessions with thehousehold to show them how they can save moneyand save time by travelling more sustainably. Theproblem with all these measures is that they costmoney. They have costs attached to them. The waythe funding regime is currently structured is thatmost of the funding for transport-related measures iscapital funding. Only certain types of scheme qualifyfor capital funding—which encourages investmentin infrastructure and encourages investment in roadbuilding. The Commission therefore argued in theirreport for being able to capitalise on some of thesmarter choice measures. Some of those schemeswhich are about working with people to encouragethem to choose more sustainable modes of transportactually count as capital schemes because they havebeen shown to be very eVective. For example, carsharing schemes, which a number of councils run,have been very eVective in encouraging people toshare cars and thereby reduce their carbonemissions.



Q22 Colin Challen: In the Commission’s report thereis a case study which is looking at London, and thereis a heavy emphasis, of course, on what buses can do.I am just wondering whether the deregulation ofbuses outside London is an issue in tacklingemissions. Should we not be able to tell thosecompanies more about what they should be doing,rather than just developing schemes which if theyincrease the usage of their buses simply increase theirprofits, possibly with no payback to the communityby making a bigger contribution to it?Professor Chesshire: I do not have any operationalexperience.Mr Mind: It is a bit out of my competence but myunderstanding is that Transport for London havegreater powers than most local authorities inrelation to the power they exercise over, for example,the frequency of buses, the timetabling. Certainlythere is an argument for giving local authoritiesmore power over the bus companies, to encourage aservice that would enable people to travel moresustainably.Professor Chesshire: Could I give you anotherexample which struck me, which I do not think is inour report. We had some technical sessions withtransport planners and one example was the closureof general hospitals or the relocation of functions togeneral hospitals. We learned that one generalhospital normally generates three million journeys ayear. That is the daily travel of all the staV on thethree shift pattern, all the food supplies, all themedical supplies, all the patients, the specialists, theday visits and the rest of it. That is an enormousfootprint. I have never been aware, for example, inthe hospitals in Brighton, of cycle-rack provisionbeing integrated or of adequate cycle-rack provisionat railway stations. It is developing. No-one is reallyrealising that a journey has two points and isworking only on the start point. I think people arefrustrated, in that they might choose to go green bymode of transport but when they arrive at a publicly-owned site there is no facility for them. I think it isincumbent on local authorities through strategicpartnerships and other public sector players, as itwere, to ensure joined-upness in that way: not just inrailway timetables and bus timetables but in basicinfrastructure provision, which itself is not veryexpensive. Local authorities have no control, as Iunderstand it, of a decision by a health authority toclose down a general hospital, but the impact interms of traYc generation is absolutely enormous.There is an example—and I do not want to be toolocal here—of closures in West Sussex moving traYcinto Brighton—which is congested enough, thankyou very much indeed. These kinds of decisions arewell outside the control of the local authority but thelocal authority ends up with the implications of it.That is why we are asking for a joined-up approachbetween the local authority and other public serviceprovision, particularly in the transport area.

Q23 Colin Challen: How useful has the EnergySaving Trust green fleet programme been or, indeed,the Department for Transport’s Sustainable TravelTowns programme? Have they made impacts ofany value?

Professor Chesshire: The Energy Saving Trust—andI am not familiar with the detail, Chairman—havereached about 40 or slightly more local authorities.From the case studies we have read about as part ofour inquiry, the savings were well worth reporting,as it were. We are recommending that all localauthorities should take up their scheme by the end ofthis calendar year.Mr Mind: In relation to the Sustainable TravelTowns, they are pilots. There has been funding forthose pilots. The big question is how youmainstream those pilots, which I understand havebeen broadly successful.

Q24 Martin Horwood: This is at the even moreexpensive end of sustainable transport, but do youthink enough is being done to support radicalalternatives, like light rail or trams and so on, whichhave been implemented in a few places in large urbanareas but not on a very widespread basis?Councillor Bettison: The more radical schemes, ofcourse, tend to involve considerable capitalexpenditure. Whilst under prudential borrowing it ispossible for authorities to borrow capital, given thatvery few have any of their own any longer—and thatis fine; indeed, often the borrowing is supported withcentral government essentially paying the interest—the trouble is that if you are a “floor” authority—and one-third of all authorities now are on thefloor—you may notionally get that interest paid toyou but, in reality, you do not get a penny becauseyou are on the floor or beneath the floor. The realityis you would then have to make cuts in services togive yourself suYcient headway with your funds tobe able to support the interest on that loan. The oVerof the central government to support borrowing forlocal government for one-third of all councils has nomerit whatsoever, so we do come back again to theavailability of capital.

Q25 Colin Challen: We have heard about the hugeprocurement footprint of local authorities and, also,about the very tight budgets that authorities have todeal with. Is that a conflict which really prevents theeVective implementation of green procurementactivities because the people who are having to buythings are always being told, “You have to spendless” and some green things may cost a bit more?Professor Chesshire: Our judgment was that,initially, first-oV costs might be higher down thegreen route. We do not always accept that is the caseand there are examples where it is not the case, butwe think some combination of smart procurement,by which we mean getting volume eVects/economiesof scale eVects by joint procurement, should morethan oVset the green costs, as it were, the premium asa result of being green. We did take evidence, I thinkfrom an east of England partnership, but correct meif I am wrong, where they are experimentingthemselves, in combining economies of scalethrough smart purchasing and, also, a degree ofassurance from the supply chain by trying to smooththe orders over a period of time to extract lowercosts, whereas, at the same time, moving towardsgreater green procurement in the hope that they keep



their costs fairly level. They are not suggesting earlyon that they will be able to reduce costs, because thegreen products are coming in at a bit of a premium,but as that market expands I would hope that thatpremium becomes a discount. I do not have anypractical experience of procurement/ordering insidea local authority.

Q26 Colin Challen: I was thinking of anotherexample, which may also apply in local authorities.The example is from central government, where, inWhitehall, the local government buildings areheated by a district heating scheme from a boiler inthe MoD building and, therefore, to implement aninitiative in your building you have to get theapproval of another department, as it were, and ifthat approval is not forthcoming you get into thisreally deep and impenetrable bureaucratic maze.Does that happen in local authorities? Are localauthorities in a better position to sweep away thosesorts of bureaucratic issues?Councillor Bettison: There is no doubt thatpartnerships bring challenges, but the procurementpartnerships that are in place in most parts of thecountry now, as regional procurement initiativesand sub-regional procurement initiatives, seek tosmooth out those lumps and bumps, depending onthe vagaries of individual organisations. Certainlywith partnerships, you are absolutely right, in thatthere are challenges. It is always a challenge whenone partner suddenly decides, for reasons bestknown to themselves, to withdraw. Certainly formuch of what local authorities purchase, they havelittle choice over purchasing. If the partnership isworking well and it is being managed well, then thereshould be no or fewer surprises in that regard. Wehope, as the professor said, we can get not only lowercosts but improved eYciency and sustainability inour procurement in that way.Professor Chesshire: I think it can be done indirectly.To give an example, West Sussex County Council, asa condition of bidding, require their subcontractorsor contractors to identify their carbon best practices,as it were. You build it in as part of the process. I ama bit concerned if you think everything falls on alocal authority, as it were. I think there are thingslocal authorities can do in saying, “If you want tonegotiate and tender with us for a contract or be onour bidding lists and so on, here are some of theminimum requirements that we are seeking. Do youmeasure your own footprint? Do you belong toenvironmental standards organisations?”—thosesorts of things. We will have to see to what extentthat does lead to higher costs. I think central andlocal government could say to the oYce industry, ascentral government is beginning to say, “We are onlylikely to occupy buildings that are amongst the topquartile of energy eYciency and carbonperformance”. You just make the statement and thatbegins to create its own bow wave of expectation inthe sector. I think we also need to be a little moreanticipatory. I see no reason why one should not, forexample—although there may be Europeanrestrictions of which one needs to be careful—havenegotiations with the oYce machine sector and say,

“The expectation is for procurement to require a onewatt standby” or “for all appliances to have an on/oV button” or some fairly basic statements. I havejust bought a modern scanner. It has no on/oVswitch. It is not available in the range. Surely thereare fairly basic statements one can say about whatkind of product would be acceptable in three to fiveyears. I do not mean just the energy eYciency labelof the Energy Saving Trust. That can apply in theshort term and so on, but it is broad statementsabout the level of expectation which public sectorprocurement oYces are going to be placing on thesupply chain.

Q27 Mr Chaytor: Does the LGA have any idea ofthe amount of money that is currently being spent bylocal authorities on climate change policy, eitheradaptation or other forms of policy?Mr Mind: I do not think we do have an estimate ofthat nature. In fact, it would be very diYcult toundertake that kind of calculation. From theconversation this morning you get a sense of therange of local government functions on whichclimate change has an impact: transport,procurement, housing, planning. Within each ofthose functions there is an opportunity both toreduce carbon emissions and build that into policyand practice and make decisions that are resilient toclimate change, which is already happening. Weknow that the number of authorities which areappointing specific climate change oYcers isgrowing, but we only know that anecdotally. If wewere able to measure that—which of itself I thinkmight be quite diYcult—it would only give us asmall part of the picture.

Q28 Mr Chaytor: What is the view about the valueof targeted funding streams from centralgovernment or individual local authorities carvingout a special budget for climate change measures, asagainst mainstream climate change into all policyareas and all funding streams? Should every fundingstream now have a climate change component?Should there be climate change implications beforethe new policies are considered?Mr Mind: One of the recommendations in theCommission’s report is that every major policyplanning or investment or spending decision shouldhave a carbon impact assessment, which is amechanism through which you could mainstreamtackling climate change right across a council’sfunctions. In relation to your earlier point, I thinkthere are several things that councils can do and havedone in relation to funding. One is to create anenergy budget. By creating that energy budget andthen making savings against that budget, you createfunding for climate change initiatives. In terms ofthe need for more resources—and this is the onething that councils say they need to be able to tackleclimate change more eVectively—there are broadlytwo options. Do you invest generically in capacityacross councils or do you invest in achievingparticular policy objectives (which might be buildingthe number of councils who operate greenprocurement or building the number of



demonstration schemes in terms of decentralisedenergy)? There are options really, whether you makethe investment generically or targeted.

Q29 Mr Chaytor: Are there any obvious gaps in thepowers currently available to local authorities or doyou think that for a local authority with the rightdetermination they have suYcient powers to moveforward?Mr Mind: Another key recommendation of theCommission which the Local GovernmentAssociation is thinking about is that we need toconsider the statutory underpinning for localgovernment action on climate change. TheCommission itself floats some specific ideas aboutnew powers that councils might have.

Q30 Mr Chaytor: Such as? Could you give us one ortwo examples?Mr Mind: In the sub-national review, for example,the Government announced that it would becreating a duty for councils to consider the economicdevelopment of their areas and the Commissionargued that that duty should consider thesustainable economic development. That is onepossibility. Another, which John has touched on, isstrengthening local authorities’ powers to challengedecisions made by other agencies, particularly publicsector agencies, in an area that might have a veryhigh carbon impact—and the closure of a criticalpiece of community infrastructure might be anexample—and having an opportunity for the localcouncil perhaps to scrutinise and challenge thatdecision. There are examples in the planningframework, for example, and a number of councilsare arguing for being able to require developers toconnect to particular sources of local energygeneration.

Q31 Mr Chaytor: In terms of the well-being powersin the Local Government Act 2000, is there anyevidence of these well-being powers being usedimaginatively or creatively?Councillor Bettison: If you are looking for specificexamples, then I would be happy to submit some tothe Committee afterwards3 and we could take thaton board. So far as using that particular power, wehave to bear in mind that the reality is that thatpower has tended to be a power of last resortwhereas I believe it was intended to be a power offirst resort, but it is coming up the list of reasons todo things. I am sure we can come up with someexamples for you4.Professor Chesshire: I am sorry if we are fluYngaround the exemplars. I tend not, when I chaircommittees, to flash up lots of examples, as it were.We do have toolkits and we do have evidence wherethere are examples and we do quote them, but wehave not drawn much attention to them in oursummary report. The second point I would make inresponse to the question you asked originally, is thattransparency in the carbon accounting framework isgoing to inform decisions as well. You have to build

3 See Ev 174 See Ev 17

it into a system of carbon accounts. It is the oldadage: “What you don’t measure you can’t manage”as it were. A tighter carbon accounting framework isgoing to assist. It will take some time to develop. Weare beginning to get information from Defra and soon, which will be refined this year and gooperationally live next year, but we need it at a lowerlevel as well. We need carbon declarations on majorassets, like oYce computer equipment and so on. Ithink many of the guidebooks and handbooks couldbe much more explicit as to the operating and theend-of-life carbon footprints, such as in materialsseparation. There are a whole lot of things worthtransparency of decision making, in my view, and itwould not always be a question of “Do we haveexplicit targets built into our monetary budgeting toaddress carbon?” Greater transparency, as it were,will steer the market and decision makers—and Ithink more usefully.

Q32 Jo Swinson: I would like to investigate therelationship between central government and localgovernment. Have you found that there areconflicts—and, if so, what are they—between whatcentral government asks local government to do, socertain things which are negative towards theenvironment while at the same time there is thisgeneral push towards reducing emissions andimprove environmental policy?Mr Mind: I think there are a number of quite bigpolicy tensions, and they are well rehearsed, in termsof the national framework. In terms of procurementand whole-life costing, the drive from centralgovernment towards local government is very mucharound financial eYciency and quite challengingshort-term financial eYciency targets. When we talkabout whole-life costing and investing upfront in, ifI can describe them in this way, “green alternatives”,then that is a barrier, and procurement oYcers inlocal government would describe short-termfinancial eYciency as the biggest barrier to realisingwhole-life costing. That is one example.

Q33 Jo Swinson: Are there any otherrecommendations on how these conflicts can bebetter managed by central government?Professor Chesshire: I do not think there is a conflict,but it is to provide a richer statutory context in whichlocal authorities are empowered to act, as it were. Ihave mentioned the role of innovation and initiative.Clearly there is a very long tail. The suggestion isthat better performance is broadening it out but I ampersonally still very concerned that some localauthorities do not really seem to have discoveredclimate change yet, and amongst some of thoseleaders there are some deniers—which is probablytrue of the population at large. We give someexamples in our report of where government coulduse opportunities, as legislation goes through theHouse this year, to pepper that legislation withmeasures which would focus local authorities andincentivise local authorities, as it were. Outside thenarrow statutory framework is a broader statutoryframework which would be relevant to localgovernment. From my experience, partly as



Chairman of this but also from other opportunitiesin local government, local government is not alwaysseen as being competent by central government.LGA would not bless me for saying this: myobservation is that local government is at least ascompetent as central government. But there is a kindof disdain, somehow, I notice, in central civilservants, in the way they commented to me when Imet them bilaterally—“Oh, well, you can try it,John, but don’t expect to great deal. You could belosing nine months of your life chairing thatCommission” and those kinds of very friendly, welldirected comments and so on. My experience ofhaving advised select committees for 22 years is thatcentral government is not doing a much better jobitself, quite frankly. I would hope we can encouragea more grown-up dialogue between central and localgovernment. One other thing I would note as well isthat as government finds challenges more and morediYcult to tackle, be they fuel poverty, transport orclimate change, they have a more mature dialoguewith local government because they realise they areon the ground, they have a lot of powers, they havemore opportunities, they can seek initiatives andbuild it into greening local communities, planningprocesses and so on. Whitehall is largely blind tothose processes. These are the fundamental changeprocesses actually on the ground aVecting buildings,planning decisions, transport infrastructures andeven behaviours. That is all at arm’s-length to SirHumphrey in my experience.

Q34 Jo Swinson: Obviously that is quite a goodcharacterisation of the diYculties but are theresynergies, are there examples where there are goodconnections between local and national policies andactions taking place at the moment, or is that whatwe are aiming towards?Professor Chesshire: One thing that astonishes me,and I will let the professionals in the LGA comment,is I am not aware of any exchange between centraland local government staV, for example, none at all.If you are a bright bunny, fast stream going into theCivil Service you can get quite far up the systemwithout knowing how to add up in my experience.Going into a big housing department in Birminghamor to a renewable energy division in Cornwall mightjust be a rather useful experience, and vice versa.Unless we do join up in dialogue, unless we get ridof this haughty disdain, which I sensed actually, ofcentral policy wonkers for local policy wonkers, I donot think we are going to get very far in thisparticular area. I am going well beyond my brief asChairman of the Local Government Commission.That is a very powerful observation which I have.Mr Mind: If I could paint a slightly more positivepicture.Councillor Bettison: Please do.Mr Mind: In terms of tackling climate change we areat the early stages of a long journey and over the lasttwo years there has been a dramatic intensificationin setting the policy framework for both nationaland local action on climate change. We have had avery positive dialogue with national Government,for example, in setting the policy framework for

tackling climate change in the new performanceframework where the Local GovernmentAssociation was calling for national outcomes andindicators on climate change. I think that is onedimension and I could make reference to severalothers. We have a long way to go in getting the policyframework right in tackling the existing housingstock, in planning, in procurement, all the areas wehave discussed this morning. There is a very positivedialogue between national and local governmentabout how we do it and increasing recognition incentral government of the local role. Of course, wewould say that recognition is stronger in somedepartments than others but there is some exchangebetween central government and local government.I came from the Treasury to the LGA.

Q35 Jo Swinson: Very good. In terms of the supportthat councils have to address climate change, I thinkit was mentioned earlier that there are somedepartments in your authority with one member ofstaV. How much is that a barrier to councils beingable to act well to tackle this problem?Councillor Bettison: Whilst it is only right that thismorning we should have emphasised, whereappropriate, the financial diYculties and challengesfacing some authorities, we should not dwellunnecessarily long on that because there areconsiderably brighter areas as well. Certainly localauthorities by and large realise that they are on thefrontline when it comes to climate change in terms ofboth mitigation and more especially adaptationbecause much of what local authorities do as oureveryday business will need to adapt in the futureand has had to adapt. Local authorities are not shyin stepping forward there within their constraints.Certainly there is a wish amongst most authorities towork with central government. There is certainly awish within the LGA to establish good links withopposite numbers in central government at memberlevel. I certainly meet Defra ministers on a regularbasis in order to see how we can work together. Anexample of that was putting into the Bill the pilotscheme for waste charging which we lobbied hardfor and we worked hard with the relevant minister toget that one through.

Q36 Jo Swinson: At oYcer level as well, how easy isit for the advice, information and support to begained by the oYcers in what can sometimes be quitea complex area?Mr Mind: First of all, a really key point is just thenumber of functions across local authorities that areimpacted by climate change and increasinglycontinuing professional development is embracingclimate change. There is certainly no shortage ofconferences and events and networks arestrengthening. There is a skills and capacity issue butit is beginning to be addressed and we need to thinkmore systematically about how we address thatissue, not just in local government but right acrossthe public sector. To give you an example, from 2010the 100 largest authorities will be subject to a carbontrading regime whereas at the moment there is justone local authority, Kirklees, that is carbon trading.



In the next couple of years the finance function, andI assume it will be the finance function, of localgovernment has got to gear up in that area and thereare many other areas where you could cite similarexamples. We need to do that systematically acrossthe public sector.

Q37 Jo Swinson: Is there additional support thatlocal government will be looking for fromorganisations like the Energy Saving Trust, theCarbon Trust, IDeA and so on, that would be usefulto look towards developing that supportmechanism?Professor Chesshire: We would certainly argue thatthis upskilling, as it were, as Philip very properlysays, both in range and depth is a constraint on somelocal authorities at the moment. I would particularlyinstance small district councils. Possibly it isunrealistic in any circumstances to expect them tohave a full range of capacity across planning,renewables, transport, housing, waste and all therest of it. One of the things we were talking about inthe report, and certainly in our discussions with localauthorities, was the extent to which it might bepossible for contiguous local authorities to actuallydo a specialisation, as it were, an enhancednetworking, although it might be seen as a loss ofsovereignty, I appreciate, for one particular districtcouncil to realise that not all of them can haveexpertise across the whole waterfront, as it were, andcertainly in areas like adaptation contiguous localauthorities are likely to face a similar problem, bethey on the coast or on a river plain that is prone toflooding or whatever. In some areas one canrationally justify some sharing of expertise and soon. The same may well be true in some transportinfrastructures as well away from the city areas, withcommon nodes and so on across a county councilarea which might be exploited in that way. I do notthink it is realistic to expect councils to have anoYcer for every function we have identified, I cannotimagine that their time would be very usefully orfully deployed. I want to avoid giving the impressionthat councils need to appoint a climate changeoYcer. They probably do to be the central point ofcontact to track inquiries like your own and reportslike ours, but we want to embed those kinds of skills,those sensitivities, as it were, across the accountingfunction, planning function, all the diVerentfunctions in local government. That may mean thatwe do not need such specialised oYcers operating atdistrict council level. There is a lot of CPD. We giveexamples in the report, and I do not think there istime to give more, but we certainly suggest theCarbon Trust, IDeA, EST and a number of others,Skills Councils and so on, that need to be aware ofthis agenda. One thing we have not talked about onskills, just before I finish, is certainly in the planningfunction I know there is a very, very severe concerngiven low recruitment in the past that a lot ofexperienced planners are now at the age of 55 or so,so the Beachy Head retirement eVect is going to bea major concern here unless we get it right, so somesuccession planning is critical in some of these morestrategic functions.

Councillor Bettison: Could I just add that both themitigation of climate change and adaptation to it isnot so much a subject as more an ethos and needs toembed within local authorities and, indeed, allorganisations. I should point out that I spent fiveyears within the LGA as their e.governmentchampion working then with central government onthe implementation of electronic government whichwas a programme that very closely monitored localauthorities over a five year period as they began theirjourney towards electronic governance. The bigdiVerence between the two programmes, becauseactually there are an awful lot of similarities, is therewas annual funding for IEG and there is no annualfunding for local authorities to adapt to climatechange.

Q38 Colin Challen: Can I follow on this point ofskills for a very brief moment. In the report it saysthat 86 per cent of councils identified insuYcientstaV and staV time to tackle climate change and youmentioned energy management as one of these keyareas where there is a shortage of skills. I cannotreally understand how anybody today involved inenergy management cannot themselves understandwhat they need to do to tackle climate change, itmust be integral to their jobs. How can that be askills shortage?Mr Mind: It is a general shortage of energymanagers, as I understand it, and the fact that theprivate sector is able to provide more competitivesalaries than local government. There has been amove of trained and skilled energy managers whohave this skill set from the public sector to theprivate sector.

Q39 Colin Challen: Is it safe to assume that thosecouncils that do not have energy managers do nothave energy management? Somebody must do itsurely, or do they just pay the bills as they come inand do not ask any questions?Professor Chesshire: I think, as you will be aware, ifone looks back over 15/20 years a lot of energymanagement functions in local government,universities and the private sector were eitherabandoned or transmogrified into purchasing oYcerfunctions, as it were, where the skills one had as anenergy manager to reduce the size of the billpreviously had focused on cutting quantity butsuddenly only concentrated on price and negotiatingprice. In my close observation of this field over aperiod the age profile aged quickly and those whohave got used to dealing with quantities of energy,the technical side as it were, are leaving the field andthe procurement people are those who have been inthe majority because they know how to negotiatewith competing energy suppliers. The secondproblem of concern about energy managers andcarbon oYcers and so on is that they should not beseen as “nerds” within their organisations and wellwithin a silo as a technical specialist. Unless they canbe brought out of those silos and impinge onplanning decisions or do a carbon evaluation of aplanning decision my fear is we are not going to seethe level and quality of change, the speed of change,



which I very much hope we will see. My experienceof energy management functions, and I do not meanto demean the people who do them, they areabsolutely skilled resources, is they do not usuallyhave much projection higher up the organogram andthey need to have that in the future. It is a finishingschool extra.

Q40 Colin Challen: What role has the NottinghamDeclaration played in those councils who havesigned up to it? Has it made a big diVerence?Councillor Bettison: I tend to view the NottinghamDeclaration as the first rung on a ladder for localauthorities because it is a very easy thing to do tosay, “We have signed up to the NottinghamDeclaration”. It is considerably harder, of course, tobegin to implement the diVerent facets of thatDeclaration within one’s authority. That requires alot more commitment than we have seen from someauthorities who have simply signed up to it and theonly thing they seem to have done subsequently isbought a frame for it.

Q41 Colin Challen: It does beg the question how theyare held to account when they do sign up to it?Should they be strengthened?Councillor Bettison: Indeed, in a conversation that Ihad earlier with the chairman and chief executive ofthe Environment Agency we were looking at ways inwhich the Nottingham Declaration may be “beefed-up”. Obviously it is not for us to say what shouldhappen because it is not our Declaration, as such,but there are a number of ways in which one could,if Nottingham were minded, take it a stage or two orthree further in terms of implementation of the itemswithin the Declaration and then allow peer pressureto take over in terms of it is not just good enough tohave signed up because we have got about two-thirds of all authorities that have now signed.

Q42 Joan Walley: A couple of very quick questions.Are we relying on the goodwill of authorities tofollow Nottingham’s example or should we not belooking towards mandatory outcome-based targetsfor action on climate change in the local governmentperformance framework?Councillor Bettison: The LAAs will give localauthorities the opportunity to set targets and then bejudged against those targets, so we see that localauthorities will be stepping up to the plate.

Q43 Joan Walley: But is there not a diVerencebetween an opportunity to do something and astatutory duty to act on climate change?Mr Mind: The policy in this area is fairly recent. Youhave to have a bit of a technical understanding ofhow Local Area Agreements work to fullyunderstand it. Basically there are 198 performanceindicators that apply to every local council. They areout to consultation now and two of them relate tocarbon reduction, one in the local authority estate,the other in the community, and a third in relationto adaptation. It is for local strategic partners todecide, in negotiation with the Government OYce,

which of those indicators it selects as stretchimprovement targets. Regardless of whether or notit does that, and that will depend on its decisionabout local priorities in negotiation withGovernment, all councils will be measured on thosecarbon reduction indicators, so we have that andthat will be very powerful in generating change.There is a wider comprehensive area assessment thatthe Audit Commission will undertake in relation toarea performance, which includes the local councilperformance, and the Audit Commission have madesome very powerful statements about the extent towhich they will look at the sustainable use ofresources, so there is some consultation on thecomprehensive area assessment and they have saidquite clearly that the way a council uses energy andreduces carbon emissions will be part of the viewthey take on how eVectively a council is using itsresources, so that will be a really powerful driver aswell.

Q44 Joan Walley: Just to cut you short, powerfuldrivers, yes, but are we not perhaps at a stagewhereby the traditional way in which what localauthorities do is discretionary according to localneed, should there not be some kind of trumpingcard which says that on all the services, given theshort amount of time that there is to deal withclimate change, we cannot leave it to whether or notthey pick up one of these 198 performance indicatorsbut that whatever is done should be underpinned bythis duty in respect of carbon?Professor Chesshire: This occupied my brain a lotduring the Commission inquiry and a lot of us werevexed about it. It is really assurance. We want anassurance that there will be this response. In ourevidence, as we say in our report, many, manypeople gave the response, “The local governmentneeds a statutory duty, just slap a statutory duty onthem”, but some of us are wiser old owls than that.The numbers of statutory duties local governmenthave can be measured in the thousands, many ofthem forgotten quite frankly. In central government,an area close to both of our hearts—fuel poverty—I draw the analogue between the Fuel PovertyStrategy and the Climate Change Strategy, bothhave statutory frameworks and both have advisorygroups, report to Parliament, et cetera. One isignored as Government says, “No, we are the firstcountry in the world to put in place a statutoryframework with binding targets” and I tend to laugha little bit from my fuel poverty perspective.

Q45 Joan Walley: So what should happen?Professor Chesshire: The nearer they come to beachieved and being measured on a target, the moreit is dismissed or re-interpreted or whatever. I do notthink it is an honest response to say that we need astatutory duty and that will solve the problem. Whatwe have to do is say how do we seek to achieve someassurance of an eVective response from localgovernment and we have suggested lots and lots andlots of diVerent ways. As a fallback, and this is for



the LGA to respond to, we have said as theCommission, as you probably know, we would liketo be reconvened in six months’ time to see to whatextent the LGA, through its consultation with itsmembership, is beginning to put a framework inplace, and we would like to be reconvened in twoyears’ time to measure on the basis of a new localgovernment survey actual practice on the ground.Before the cynics think we are all after fees, this ispro bono work, but we think we do need to showsome momentum. The final point I would make onthat one is a lot of measures are being put in place aswe identify in the report and we ought to give them

Supplementary memorandum submitted by Local Government Association

Many thanks for inviting the LGA to give evidence to the EAC enquiry on Climate Change and Local,Regional and Devolved Government. During the evidence session we promised to write to the committee onthe issue of whether any councils has specifically used wellbeing powers to help them tackle climate change.

We have talked to a number of our member councils who have been innovate in tackling climate change,and the Energy Savings Trust, to see if the wellbeing power has been instrumental in their success. We wereinterested to discover that the wellbeing power has indeed been used by a number of councils. I have encloseda brief describing how these councils have used the power and what success they have achieved with it.

I was very pleased to see that the EAC is undertaking this enquiry as local goveernment has a key role intackling climate change. This March the LGA is planning to launch a major new campaign to help councilsbetter tackle climate change, and we will be happy to keep you and the committee updated on its progress.

The Well-being Power has been an Important Tool for Councils to Tackle Climate Change

Islington Council

The well-being power allowed Islington Council to enter a contract to provide services to a charitableorganisation advising them on energy savings projects. Without the well-being power it is not clear how thecouncil could have entered the contract with the charity which was not a “public body” as defined in theLocal Authorities Goods and Services Act 1970.

Islington Council were also able to use the well-being power to give a legal justification to their agreementto create a £3 million Climate Change Fund. This fund will be used to pay for capital projects that will reduceCO2 emissions in the borough.

Fenland District Council

Using the power of well-being, Fenland set up FenESS, an energy services scheme combining energysupply with the provision of measures concerned with eYcient use. FenESS oVers a range of benefits toregistered social landlords and public and private sector landlords, whilst helping energy conservationauthorities to achieve their environmental targets.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council

The power of well-being enabled the local authority to join the UK Emissions Trading Scheme. The UKETS oVered an opportunity for the council to secure additional funding over the next few years to reducethe amount of carbon dioxide emissions from its corporate operations. In return, it has signed up to a legallybinding reduction of 1,000 tCo2e for part of its municipal buildings by December 2006; representing a 12%reduction.

Nottinghamshire County Council

The power enabled the creation of Renewable Nottinghamshire Utilities Ltd (ReNU), which aims todevelop the physical and commercial infrastructure necessary to encourage the wood heat industry in theEast Midlands.

a bit of a chance. I am not yet convinced that thisslapping a statutory duty on anybody necessarilyaccelerates momentum or achieves an outcome.

Q46 Chairman: We are going to have to draw this toa close, I am afraid, although there are other areaswe might have covered had we had more time. Weare very grateful to you for coming in. If there arefurther points, perhaps we might deal with thosethrough correspondence at a later date. Thank youvery much indeed.Professor Chesshire: Good luck with your inquiry.Chairman: Thank you.


Tuesday 22 January 2008

Members present


Mr Martin Caton Mr Ian Liddell-GraingerColin Challen Mr Graham StuartMr David Chayter Jo SwinsonMartin Horwood Dr Desmond TurnerMark Lazarowicz

Memorandum submitted by Hampshire County Council

The Environmental Audit Committee is asking some very important questions, answers to which willneed investment of time and expertise in order to reach meaningful conclusions. Hampshire County Councilhas developed some expertise which may be helpful in reaching these conclusions.

1. Organisation Profile

— High performing Authority, recent corporate assessment rating of 4/4.

— Budget of £1.4 billion per annum.

— Capital Programme spend of £200 million over the next five years.

— Population 1.25 million residents.

— Over 525,000 households.

— 541 schools serving over 170,000 pupils.

— Largest employer in Hampshire with around 35,000 employees.

1.1 Hampshire County Council has been engaged with climate change issues since the late 1990s,developing its role as a community leader on climate change. Early commitments were made to reduceclimate change, eg signing the Nottingham Declaration in 2001, being a pilot in Councils for ClimateProtection and the Carbon Management Programme. It was a founder member of the South East ClimateChange Partnership, leads the ESPACE European project and has been part of the Advisory Group to theEU on adaptation to climate change.

1.2 Hampshire County Council recognises that it has a vital role to play in responding to the challengesof climate change. Hampshire is within one of the most dynamic and productive regions in Europe. A regionthat makes a significant contribution to the prosperity of the UK. It is also a region that is likely to be mostaVected by climate change. The County Council recognises that climate change will impact upon the social,economic and environmental well-being of Hampshire and its community. There is a need to developintegrated responses to reduce the risks and seize the opportunities that climate change will bring.

1.3 The climate change programme for Hampshire County Council covers three main areas of work:

— Mitigation.

— Adaptation.

— Change Management.

This work includes projects which focus on actions to benefit the community, on corporate issues toimprove our own performance and in some cases, those which address both.

Hampshire County Council has a number of partnerships at local, regional, national and EU levels, whichallow the exchange of information and experience on mitigating and adapting to climate change. We arealso directly involved in developing our own projects to address climate change issues both within theCounty Council and in the community of Hampshire.

1. How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government and devolvedadministrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areas like wasteand transport? What funding, powers, and structures are required to improve joined up delivery of climatechange policy at all levels of government?

As a local authority and the democratic interface between Government and the community we need anumber of things to carry out our role eVectively. Amongst these are:

— Information—we need to keep up to date with current developments and research and be able toprovide advice to the community and to organisations we work with.


— Tools—in order to deliver our climate change programme we may need additional tools/methodologies/models; some of these may be existing ones developed by others that we can adaptfor our use, some may be new ones that are developed jointly through working with partners.

— Policies—we need to adapt or create policies to address climate change issues both of mitigationand adaptation. We also need to be able to influence policies that are developed at the regional,national and European level to ensure maximum beneficial impact on Hampshire’s community.

— Resources—one of the barriers to local administrations participating in the development ofresearch, methodologies and strategic policies, is the availability of suYcient resources. One wayof facilitating this work is the opportunity to participate in funded programmes.

— Joint working—local authorities and Government need to work together more closely to developsolutions and programmes.

2. Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can the accountabilityand transparency of the response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?

— The role of local authorities is not explicit with regard to tackling climate change.

— Creating a vision—Hampshire County Council has adopted a goal that within a decadeHampshire should prosper without risking our environment. Climate change is likely to have thegreatest potential for threatening the successful achievement of this goal.

— Local leadership—Hampshire County Council, has developed a climate change programme bylargely acting on its own initiative and as a champion organisation for climate change. Thisapproach develops a response that suits the needs of our community and takes account of localchallenges and opportunities in Hampshire.

— As early signatories to the Nottingham Declaration Hampshire County Council has been able toharness the opportunities of this initiative in a pro-active way.

3. What, if anything, needs to be changed in the framework governing the actions of devolved administrations,regional government and local authorities? For example, does there need to be a more explicit reference toclimate change in the local government performance framework and will the new performance indicators onclimate change be enough to stimulate action?

— Identifying local needs and priorities—through our Commission of Inquiry in Hampshire we havebeen able to identify issues and challenges that are particularly relevant to our county. We aim tocontinue this work and engage with key organisations to deliver a programme of actions.

— Performance Frameworks—need to take account of local distinctiveness and be better integrated.

— Measuring adaptation—Creating a measurable performance indicator remains a challenge foradaptation. The change management tools we are developing may provide a useful aid here.

4. How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climatechange? What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are local authorities, regionalgovernment and devolved administrations?

— Planning and implementing change— eVective adaptation responses at a local level will need to besupported by eVective national policy frameworks and resources.

— Developing expertise—We recognise that a certain amount of change is already inevitable and weneed to plan to do things diVerently so that we are well-adapted and prepared for the consequencesof these changes. As a coastal county we face challenges in the coastal zone with rising sea levelsthat will aVect coastal communities, as well as the leisure, ports and other marine industries.

— Identifying local needs and priorities—through our Commission of Inquiry in Hampshire we havebeen able to identify issues and challenges that are particularly relevant to our county. We aim tocontinue this work and engage with key organisations to deliver a programme of actions.

— Developing cost-eVective solutions—timely decisions and implementation strategies will beneeded to achieve this.

— Working to achieve change—we have developed some techniques and tools to help us managechange. We will need to work closely with key stakeholders to gain and maintain their support.

— Assessing vulnerability—Combine change management and risk management approaches. Thesetwo complementary approaches must work together to ensure that adaptation is firmly embeddedinto spatial planning.

— Civil Contingencies Act—has the potential to provide statutory duty to plan for climate changeevents and link to emergency planning powers and responsibilities.


5. How should the Committee on Climate Change reflect the interests and needs of the diVerent levels ofgovernment across the UK?

Working together—by bringing policy makers and policy implementers together the work of theCommittee should seek to ensure that national policy frameworks are practical in their application and takeaccount of local distinctiveness.

6. What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do the diVerent levels of government have suYcientpowers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? What policies areworking well?

Working together—by bringing policy makers and policy implementers together the work of theCommittee should seek to ensure that national policy frameworks are practical in their application and takeaccount of local distinctiveness.

Supporting change—national government needs to develop a vision and a framework to enable, supportand deliver adaptation to climate change.

7. What impact will the new Planning Policy Statement on climate change have on emissions reductions andwork on adaptation? How are the so called “Merton rules” aVected? How might other planning guidance bechanged to reduce emissions?

ESPACE—the work undertaken by the ESPACE Project that Hampshire County Council leads hascontributed some useful work here. Further work is to be delivered in 2008 that examines barriers toeVective change.

8. What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central government supportfor sharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, Salix Finance, theCarbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust play in providing support?

As a local authority and the democratic interface between Government and the community we need anumber of things to carry out our role eVectively. Amongst these are:

— Information—we need to keep up to date with current developments and research and be able toprovide advice to the community and to organisations we work with.

— Tools—in order to deliver our climate change programme we may need additional tools/methodologies/models; some of these may be existing ones developed by others that we can adaptfor our use, some may be new ones that are developed jointly through working with partners.

— Policies—we need to adapt or create policies to address climate change issues both of mitigationand adaptation. We also need to be able to influence policies that are developed at the regional,national and European level to ensure maximum beneficial impact on Hampshire’s community.

— Resources—one of the barriers to local administrations participating in the development ofresearch, methodologies and strategic policies, is the availability of suYcient resources. One wayof facilitating this work is the opportunity to participate in funded programmes.

— Joint working—local authorities and Government need to work together more closely to developsolutions and programmes.

31 December 2007

Memorandum submitted by the Sustainability Manager, London Borough of Southwark

Executive Summary and Recommendations

— District heating and combined heat and power (CHP) has great potential for reducing CO2

emissions and providing energy security across an increasingly urbanised UK.

— The planned route to zero carbon homes (via the Building Regulations and Code for SustainableHomes) places too much emphasis on eliminating heat demands, while not tackling the growingelectricity demands until after 2013. This will limit the potential CO2 savings that CHP coulddeliver in new developments. Some portion of appliance electricity use should be addressed in thenext update of the Building Regulations.

— There is currently a gap in UK policy for supporting development of CHP/district heating.

— Local authorities should be given an explicit energy planning role—with particular emphasis onheat network planning.


— Government should re-introduce funding to “pump prime” investment in heating networks(building on the experience of the previous Community Energy Programme).

— Government should introduce much stronger policies to re-direct investment from heat dumpingthermal electricity generation plant to CHP and district heating.

Submitter Introduction

The Sustainability Manager is responsible for development and co-ordination of Southwark Council’sClimate Change Strategy. In December 2006 Southwark Council agreed a climate change strategy based onachieving a borough wide 80% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 (from a 2003 baseline). Energyused within buildings is responsible for 85% of the borough’s (direct) emissions, and detailed analysisidentified the optimum CO2 reduction path to be widespread adoption of CHP and district heating. Thisapproach is being pursued in the regeneration of the Elephant & Castle where a target of zero increase inCO2 emissions has been set, despite a planned increase of 300% in building floor space.

Importance of CHP and District Heating in Reducing CO2 Emissions

1. UK power stations waste around two thirds of the input energy as heat. The heat wasted by UK powergeneration is more than is required to heat every building in the UK (and to provide the hot water). Moderncombined cycle gas turbine plant can achieve eYciencies of around 50%, but these are still typically locatedremotely from electricity users and further losses (around 7%) occur through the transmission anddistribution networks. These ineYciencies result in grid electricity having the highest CO2 burden amongthe fuels used within buildings.

2. CHP can typically achieve eYciencies of over 80% by using the “waste” heat from power generationto provide space heating, hot water or heat for industrial processes. Availability of indigenous coal, oil andnatural gas led the UK to opt for centralised heat dumping power generation, along with a separatenationwide gas network for providing space heating via individual building boiler systems. Hence there hasonly been significant use of CHP for industrial use in the UK.

3. CHP generates heat and electricity at the same time, but building demands for heat and electricity varyaccording to the use of the building, time of day and season. For this reason, CHP is most eVectivelydeployed at a “neighbourhood” level supplying a mix of building types where the varying energy demandsare aggregated to make a more even profile (eg dwellings have complementary “evening/weekend” demandsto oYces and schools).

4. To operate at a neighbourhood level, CHP requires a “district” heat network. The costs of installingthis network are typically the largest capital costs of any CHP/district heating scheme. This is a long-terminvestment with returns typically made on a 20–30 year basis (however, modern heat pipe lifetimes arearound 100 years).

5. District heating also oVers greater fuel security and flexibility to move to lower carbon and renewablefuels as the network supplies energy as hot water. It is technically and economically more feasible to converta neighbourhood “energy centre” to run on bio-fuels, waste derived fuels or even a hydrogen fuel cell thanconvert hundreds of individual properties. The natural gas network “locks” consumers into using a singlefuel resource which is finite and rising in price.

6. With high heat network costs and the need for a mix of energy demand profiles, CHP/district heatingis mostly suited to dense urban areas. As 80–90% of the UK population now live in urban areas thissustainable energy supply option should be given priority.

7. Micro-CHP has been developed for individual dwellings, but this is not the best approach as plant willbe idle during weekdays and summer when heat is not required (see paragraph 3 above) and users are stilllocked into the natural gas network.

8. 70% of the homes that will be using energy in 2050 have been built already. For a large portion of this(and non-domestic) stock it will be diYcult to reduce the energy demand (eg solid walled buildings, listedbuildings etc). District heating could easily be supplied to these buildings providing further use for the“waste heat” from electricity generation.

CHP and District Heating Not Supported by UK Energy Policy

9. Current UK energy policy provides little support for CHP/district heating. In fact, in the absence ofany real incentives to develop CHP/district heating in existing stock, current policy seems most likely tominimise development of CHP/district heating.


Building Regulations and the Route to Zero Carbon Dwellings

10. Over the last decade the Building Regulations have been improved but have focussed on reducingCO2 emissions resulting from the provision of heating and hot water demand, while leaving the energy andCO2 emissions from appliance use (or ICT equipment in non-domestic buildings) untouched.

11. This approach is understandable as it is easier to regulate higher standards of building fabricinsulation along with more eYcient boiler systems than to try to tackle the wide range of electrical appliancesand ICT equipment that fill our homes and workplaces. This “unregulated” consumption is almost allelectricity, which has the highest fuel CO2 content. As a result almost 50% of the total emissions from newhomes is beyond the control of the Building Regulations.

12. An additional problem is the presence of a “fuel factor” within the Regulations which allowsdwellings that are electrically heated to meet a less stringent CO2 reduction target, than buildings usingother fuels.

13. The Government expects organisations to use the voluntary “Code for Sustainable Homes” toaccredit new homes that go beyond minimum Building Regulations. Each level of the Code sets anincremental reduction in the emissions from the “regulated” energy demands covered by the BuildingRegulations (heating, hot water and lighting). Code Level 5 requires zero CO2 from all regulated energydemands, the highest Code Level 6 is a fully “zero carbon” dwelling (eg estimated electricity consumptionfrom appliances must also be supplied by zero carbon sources).

14. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have stated that the route to zerocarbon homes in 2016 will be implemented through the Building Regulations, based on the incrementalCode Levels. But domestic appliance use will only be addressed after the 2013 update of the BuildingRegulations.

15. The overall eVect of the Building Regulations and the Code for Sustainable Homes is to design heatdemand out of dwellings, while leaving the emissions due to the rapidly growing electricity demand fromappliances untouched until 2013. CHP is the most cost eVective means of providing low carbon (or zerocarbon, if biofuels are used) electricity. But if there is little heat demand, then CHP will be unviable. Theonly other on-site options for low carbon electricity supply are solar photovoltaics and wind turbines (bothof which are more costly and practically limited in urban settings).

16. An emissions reduction “hierarchy” has rapidly become an unquestioned tenet of energy planning—this puts the minimisation of energy demands as a priority, before designing low and zero carbon systemsto meet the remaining demand. This may well be an entirely rational approach, but it makes less sense whereit is exclusively applied to one type of energy demand, ie heat.

17. It is perfectly possible to eliminate most of the heat demand of a dwelling via “super-insulation”.However, the same cannot be achieved for the dwelling’s lighting and appliance electricity use. Where theseloads are met from a national electricity generation system that dumps vast quantities of heat, it does notseem rational to spend significant capital on insulation to eliminate the heat demand. An optimum carbonsaving (per £ invested) is more likely to be achieved through a balance of insulation and deployment of CHPto oVset the heat dumping, CO2 intensive grid electricity.

The Route to Zero Carbon Non-domestic Buildings

18. The energy demand patterns of non-domestic buildings are far more diverse and complex than fordwellings. The Government has yet to set the route map and timescales for zero-carbon new non-domesticbuildings, there is no equivalent to the Code for Sustainable Homes for these buildings. A recent DCLGreport prepared by the UK Green Building Council1 (UKGBC) has highlighted that it will be much morediYcult for non-domestic buildings to reach zero carbon than domestic buildings as their ratio of electricitydemand to heat demand is much higher.

19. The analysis contained within the report challenged the zero carbon approach where each newbuilding is considered in isolation. Due to diVerent consumption patterns for heat, electricity and cooling(as highlighted in paragraph 3) a “community” based approach would be more appropriate—a CHP drivendistrict heating network linking diVerent building types.

20. In the case of non-domestic buildings, cooling represents a growing demand and this is usually metvia electric chillers. An alternative would be to use the waste heat from CHP (during the summer when thereis no space heating demand, but still electricity demand) to provide cooling via absorption chillers. Whilesuch equipment has lower eYciencies than electric chillers, it would be eVectively making use of the wasteheat from electricity generation.

1 Report on carbon reductions in new non-domestic buildings: December 2007.


Lack of Support for CHP/District Heating in Existing Stock

21. The “designing out” of heat in new dwellings would not pose a problem for development of CHP/district heating if there were suYcient support for developing heat networks among the existing stock. Theonly such support mechanism, the “Community Energy Programme” has been closed, with no equivalentscheme taking its place.

22. Hence, new development currently presents the best opportunity to develop CHP/district heatingwhich could later extend to supplying surrounding existing stock. However, the planned route to zerocarbon homes is in danger of designing out CHP from any energy solution as there is an imbalance betweentackling heat and electricity demand (until after 2013–16).

23. Local authorities with urban regeneration schemes have made some progress in supporting CHP/district heating schemes. This has largely been achieved through planning policy. In the case of Southwark’sElephant & Castle scheme, the Council is fortunate in owning a significant portion of the land and cantherefore oblige plot developers to connect to the proposed CHP heat and power network. Section 106agreements have been used to oblige connections where the Council does not own the land.

24. However, without a secure (and stable) national policy framework to support CHP/district heatinginvestors are likely to view the risks of long term investment in heat networks as being too high.

Major Gap in UK Energy Policy

25. There are a number of imbalances in current UK energy/climate policy as it applies to the built sector:

— focus on heat demand rather than electricity demand;

— focus on domestic rather than non-domestic (for both new-build and existing); and

— focus on zero carbon new build rather than “lower carbon” existing buildings.

26. In particular there is a gap in policy for community level energy systems. Policy is still focused on theopposite ends of the centralised energy supply model—eg on individual buildings and what kind ofcentralised power plant should replace those being decommissioned.

27. Local authorities (and their Local Strategic Partnerships) could be given an explicit role in local heatplanning. This would be similar to the responsibilities given to Danish local authorities in the 1979 “HeatSupply Act” which also gave powers to oblige consumers to connect to heat networks.

28. Heat networks, like any other utility network are a natural monopoly so such powers should bebalanced by adequate consumer protection (eg in Denmark there is a requirement for consumer control andprice transparency, in the UK this could be achieved through the use of “Community Interest Companies”which would ensure that the network assets are retained by the local community).

29. Investment in heat networks yields returns only on a long term basis, there is therefore a need to driveprivate sector investment into such schemes. This could be achieved through the “carrot” of funding (similarto the axed Community Energy Programme) and through the “stick” of deterring further investment in“heat dumping” centralised generation plant (eg in Denmark a simple ban was put in place on further non-CHP thermal generating plant).

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by Association of North East Councils

Introduction

The Association of North East Councils (ANEC) is the political voice for local government in the NorthEast, representing all 25 local authorities in the region, throughout Northumberland, Tyne and Wear,Durham and the Tees Valley. It is a cross-Party organisation with all of its Members being democraticallyelected and accountable politicians.

The Association welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Environmental Audit Committee’s requestfor submissions on its forthcoming inquiry into climate change and the role of local, regional and devolvedgovernment. Members of the Association, at its Plenary meeting in January 2007, gave their commitmentto tackling climate change as a key policy priority. As part of this, they endorsed the creation of a member-led Climate Change Task and Finish Group. The Group was tasked with looking at how local governmentin the North East can work collectively and collaboratively to improve its performance, reduce its impacton climate change and add value to current initiatives aimed at tackling this issue.


Summary

Local government in the North East has made a political commitment to tackling climate change througheach of the 25 local authorities signing the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change. This publiccommitment has been taken a step further through the Association, on behalf of the 25 local authorities,signing the North East Declaration on Climate Change, alongside a range of partners from the public andprivate sector. This is the first regional declaration in the country and demonstrates the political lead beingtaken in the region.

In tackling climate change, local authorities in the North East have recognised that winning the heartsand minds of individuals is essential. A consistent and clear message can encourage action to be taken byindividuals, a vital component in mitigating the impact of climate change. In order to convey this messagesuccessfully, North East local government has engaged successfully with the regional media to publicise thenumerous green initiatives being undertaken and the benefits of these.

In particular, local government has recognised the importance of engaging with young people. As part ofthis, the Association recently arranged a debate with young people which provided young people with anopportunity to question elected politicians about their role in tackling climate change, whilst ensuring thattheir views were heard and politicians were able to recognise what is important to young people.

Furthermore, local government can play a leading role through its own actions and operations. As largeestate managers, local government has the opportunity to improve energy eYciency and reduce carbonemissions considerably. The improvement of housing stock is a key goal for local government in the NorthEast. Furthermore, there is recognition that collaboratively the local authority sector can influence suppliersand producers of goods through its collective procurement spend.

The memorandum demonstrates that local government has a central role in tackling and adapting to theimpact of climate change. Through its strong community leadership role, it has the ability to forge anddevelop local partnership and is also ideally placed as the closest democratic link to the communities thatthey service. Within the North East, local government has taken the initiative and made several significantstrides towards adapting to the challenges posed by climate change.

Q1. How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government anddevolved administrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areaslike waste and transport? What funding, powers, and structures are required to improve joined up delivery ofclimate change policy at all levels of government?

1. Central government oVers the opportunity for local government to play a greater role in the tacklingof climate change, through its legislative capacity to empower local authorities with powers and resourcesto make a diVerence at a local level.

UK Climate Change Programme

2. The Association welcomes the UK Climate Change Programme, which recognised the crucial role thatlocal government can play in reducing emissions and adapting to climate change.

3. Furthermore, the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 gave localgovernment new opportunities to drive forward local action on climate change mitigation and adaptation,leading by example and through its own practices and the services it delivers, as well as placing theenvironment as a core theme in the third generation of Local Area Agreements (2008). The expectation fromDefra that all local authorities should agree a climate change mitigation target for inclusion in their LocalArea Agreements is a move that the Association supports and will ensure that climate change, and adaptingto its eVects now and reducing its impact in the future, is a central focus for local authorities across theregion.

Comprehensive Area Assessment

4. From 2009, with the Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) taking over from the ComprehensivePerformance Assessment (CPA) of local government and the measurement of performance against a singleset of outcomes through 198 national performance indicators the Association supports the inclusion ofclimate change targets being incorporated into the performance framework. A more specific considerationof the individual performance measures in given in response to question three, but the Association supportsthe move to further embed the reduction of greenhouse gases into the mainstream of local authority activitythrough the introduction of indicator NI185; “the CO2 reduction from Local Authority operations”.


Waste

5. The Association, in its response to the National Waste Strategy (July 2007) supported the approachoutlined and the underlying principles behind the strategy, the key objectives of which are to incentiviseeVorts to reduce, re-use, re-cycle waste and recover energy from waste.

6. Measures such as these indicate that within the context set out by national government, localgovernment has an important role to play in leading its many partners to make a real diVerence. Membersof the Association feel that they will encourage mitigation and also adaptation to climate change.

Transport

7. One of the major ways in which local authorities can reduce the carbon emissions in their areas isthrough transport. However, tackling transport’s contribution to climate change requires the involvementof a number of partners at all spatial levels. But councils can take action strategically to reduce transportrelated carbon emissions across each of their roles, in particular, through engaging the local community totake tough decisions, for example, on diVerential car parking charges. They can green their own fleet;encourage their suppliers to reduce transport related emissions; ensure that eVective spatial planningpromotes walking, cycling and the use of public transport; and engage with their wider community to helpthem travel sustainably.

8. Reducing carbon emissions and improving resilience need to become a feature of local strategicthinking on transport (through Local Transport Plans) using the measures that have already been developedsuch as the promotion of walking and cycling, 20 mph speed limits, workplace parking levies, road spacere-allocation, travel planning (both individual and workplace), promoting car share schemes, eco-driving,and congestion charging with diVerentiation for vehicle emissions.

9. Multi-area Agreements (MAA) have the potential to produce an eVective structure within which todevelop strong levels of sub-regional co-operation in tackling climate change. Within transport they providethe opportunity to tackle carbon emission requires sub-regional co-operation to have a significant impact,such as, for example, the co-ordination of car parking charges. The MAA provides a mechanism for crosscouncil co-operation. As local government with other strategic partners, negotiate LAAs and experimentwith MAAs we will have hard evidence of local government’s intentions and progress.

Adaptation

10. One power that the Association would wish to see in place is a further policy that encouragesadaptation. Currently there is no statutory duty on councils to take action on adaptation, other than toensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriatedevelopment in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas of highest risk. From2008, there will be an adaptation indicator in the new performance framework for local authorities. DEFRAis expecting at least one climate change target to be included. By ensuring that both mitigation andadaptation targets are embedded, this will ensure that partners will need to work collaboratively to achievethe required outcomes.

Q2. Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolvedadministrations in tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can theaccountability and transparency of the response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the NottinghamDeclaration process been?

11. Within the North East, the role of local authorities in tackling climate change is well established. Therange of partnerships established across the public, private and voluntary sectors to tackle climate changeensure that a strong degree of co-ordination exists.

Communication

12. Key to eVective coordination is eVective communication which is central to winning the hearts andminds of stakeholders, citizens and communities. The North East Local Government CommunicationsNetwork is a tremendous resource to pool experience and expertise in order to develop eVective andconsistent messages about climate change, aimed at a wide range of audiences. It was a key recommendationof the Task and Finish Group that the Communications Network is utilised to explore the development ofa single message for communications on climate change.

13. This has been developed alongside a campaign which the Association, on behalf of North East localauthorities has endorsed. Local government has recognised that the regional media in the North East hasa fundamentally important role in communicating positive messages about climate change to a massaudience. As part of a commitment to educate and raise public awareness of environmental issues, thencjMedia “Go Green” campaign is focusing on the themes of “Think Global, Act Local” and “Renew,Reuse and Recycle”.


14. The campaign provides an imaginative and eVective platform for encouraging families, schools andcommunities to renew, reuse and recycle. The campaign also aims to recognise and award achievement andbest practice through publicity and awards. It is already acting as a catalyst to encourage people to saveenergy, persuade businesses and regional organisations to play their part in a greener future, as well agalvanising communities into action. Engaging within this campaign has allowed North East localgovernment to ensure clarity exists across the region about the role of local government in tackling climatechange. On the back of the success of this coordinated campaign, the Task and Finish Group haverecommended that all opportunities to work with the press and broadcast media in the North East areexplored to promote the climate change agenda.

15. The presence of a strong communications message brings about the element of transparency andaccountability. The challenge of tackling climate change is one that everyone needs to be a part of, but yet,local authorities need to be accountable for their own actions to draw support and other organisations intotaking up the challenge themselves.

Co-ordinated approach

16. An example of a coordinated approach in action is the recognition by the Association’s ClimateChange Task and Finish Group that local government has a further opportunity to stimulate the region’seconomy by using its collaboration to articulate a collective voice to influence markets. For example, whilstproduction facilities are available on Teesside for bio diesel, bio diesel is not readily available to buy locally.In considering the fuels for council fleets of vehicles to run on bio diesel in the North East, there is a needto be able to source it locally. The fact that it is not available in the North East inhibits local authorities’ability to play their full role in tackling climate change. Local authorities could have a key role to play inopening up markets in the North East.

17. Further demonstrating the strength of local partnerships, the North East Climate ChangePartnership was formed in July 2007 to ensure the development and delivery of a co-ordinated regionalresponse to tackling climate change. The focus of North East Climate Change Partnership, through thedevelopment of the North East Climate Change Action Plan is to identify, agree and prioritise a range ofactions required across the region; and, to identify key responsibilities for delivery within diVerent sectors.These two examples indicate the level of success of a coordinated approach.

Young people

18. There are tremendous opportunities for local authorities to work with and have dialogue with youngpeople on a broad range of issues relating to climate change and their local environment. The engagementof young people is one of the Association’s key Manifesto commitments. Young people’s general enthusiasmand engagement with this subject is an important resource as local authorities seek to develop policy andinfluence and win the hearts and minds of older generations and decision-makers, as well as children andyoung people themselves.

19. The Association is participating in a steering group which is implementing the regional “ClimateChange Schools Project”, which includes the Science Learning Centre North East, amongst other partners.Its overall aim is to steer the development and implementation of a standardised package of climate changeschool resources and professional development opportunities for school teachers in all local authoritiesacross the North East.

20. In December 2007 the Association organised a debate with young people on tackling climate change,involving members of the Task and Finish Group, in order to capture the views and opinions of youngpeople from schools and organisations across the region on tackling climate change and reducing theregion’s carbon footprint, improving the local environment, recycling, energy eYciency and renewableenergy. The panel was composed of members of the Association’s Task and Finish Group as well as the RtHon Phil Wilson MP for Sedgefield. Young people took the opportunity to hold elected representatives toaccount for local government’s approach to climate change.

Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change

21. A particularly eVective tool that local government in the region have used to display their strongleadership in tackling climate change, as well as to begin to work collaboratively through networks andthrough the Association of North East Councils, has been the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change.

22. The Climate Change Task and Finish Group recommended that all North East local authoritiescommit themselves to signing the Nottingham Declaration. In becoming signatories, local authorities arecommitted to eVecting positive change and are, importantly, perceived and seen to be taking responsibilityand action by the citizens and communities they represent.


23. The Declaration has been particularly useful since, in demonstrating clear visible leadership throughcommitting to the aims contained within. Local authorities have provided their community with theopportunity to be held to account for their actions in reducing their carbon emissions. Local authorities inthe region have taken the opportunity to be seen as visible leaders in the region and this is something whichhas allowed a stronger partnership to develop between regional partners.

24. On 17 December, the Association of North East Councils, on behalf of local authorities in the region,signed the North East Declaration on Climate Change. This commitment was signed alongside a host ofregional partners from the private, public and voluntary sectors and is a regional recognition andcommitment to work collaboratively to tackle the causes and eVects of a changing climate on our region. Italso commits all the signatories to monitor the progress of their plans against the actions needed, and thenpublish the results, thereby demonstrating a strong element of accountability and transparency about theactions being undertaken.

25. This is something which the Association believes fosters good practice in tackling climate change anddemonstrates that with strong determination to succeed, good communication with all sectors and groupswithin the community and a clear demarcation of the roles and responsibilities of the diVerent bodies.

26. Local government is at the very heart of tackling climate change and in the North East localauthorities have taken up the initiative to clarify its role regionally, to build its relationships with partnersto deliver a strong collaborative and coordinated approach to reducing carbon emissions, whilst retaininga high profile to demonstrate that the local government community is leading by example and be held toaccount for the measures undertaken to deal with climate change.

Q3. What, if anything, needs to be changed in the framework governing the actions of devolved administrations,regional government and local authorities? For example, does there need to be a more explicit reference toclimate change in the local government performance framework and will the new performance indicators onclimate change be enough to stimulate action?

27. As previously detailed, local government is already taking several positive steps towards reducing theimpact of climate change, as well as tackling the causes of climate change. As part of this, the Associationwelcomes the move by Government to push climate change to the very heart of the local governmentperformance framework.

Energy eYciency

28. During its work, the Climate Change Task and Finish Group discussed the need to ensure energyeYciency is achieved in local authorities’ own buildings and capital programmes as well as its housing stock.Specifically regarding housing, the Group discussed this in the context of the ‘Decent Homes Standard’ towhich all local authorities have to adhere. Whilst funding is made available to explicitly improve thestandards of social housing stock, the Group noted that this does not include criteria for energy eYciency.The Task and Finish Group recognised that whilst it is easier to set energy eYciency standards at theplanning and development stage of new build capital programmes, the funding criteria for existing capitalrenovation and new build programmes is inadequate as energy eYciency is not a pre-requisite for spend.The net eVect is that the investment cannot be channelled to focus on energy eYciency measures inrefurbishing existing housing stock. They would wish to see energy eYciency become a pre-requisite forspend.

Performance framework

29. The Association supports the development of performance indicators (PI’s) which highlight thecarbon dioxide emissions not just from local authority operations but also per capita in the local authorityarea. This demonstrates the strong leadership role of local government in coordinating a reduction in carbondioxide emissions. Furthermore, as already stated, communication of the key messages regarding climatechange is seen by North East local government as absolutely vital to bringing about real change. These two“headline” indicators are ones that can be used by local authorities when they are reported to demonstratetheir success, but also to drive home to individuals within the area the role they too can play in tacklingclimate change.

30. The Association particularly welcomes PI NI187, which is concerned with the progress made towardstackling fuel poverty. During its work, the Climate Change Task and Finish Group strongly considered theissue of fuel poverty and its impact on climate change. The Association supported a major conference earlierthis year, organised by the leading fuel poverty charity National Energy Action and sponsored by theImprovement Partnership for North East Local Government. “Leading Energy EYcient Communities”raised awareness of the issue of energy eYciency and how actions and behaviours from the top down canlead the way to real change.


31. National Indicator 188—“adapting to climate change” is a welcome addition to the new set ofperformance measurements. Measuring the integration of incorporating action into local authority strategicplanning is very important if local authorities are to move towards adapting to the eVects of climate changewhich are beginning to emerge rather than simply mitigating the causes.

32. From the work of the Task and Finish Group, the Association feels that perhaps there is anopportunity to consider monitoring of green procurement. As a sector local government procures over £8billion per annum. Therefore the ability to influence the market in order to encourage suppliers to adoptgreener practices, whilst contributing to the growth of the economy is immense.

33. Within the North East local government sector much positive work has already been done. The NorthEast Improvement and EYciency Steering Group has recently endorsed the production and adoption of aCollaborative Procurement Concordat between all 25 local authorities, which includes sustainability as acore principle. In March 2008, the Local Government Procurement Action Plan shall follow which; throughits flexible framework shall help local authorities harness the sustainability potential from their procurementspend. In particular, the Group felt that construction should be a central focus of green procurement dueto the level of regeneration and new build within the North East. The potential exists through this new buildto reap the benefits of green procurement. Therefore, based on the positive work of the Task and FinishGroup, the Association feels that adopting a measure of green procurement could be a beneficial way ofmainstreaming greener procurement practices at all levels of government.

Q5. How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climatechange? What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are local authorities, regionalgovernment and devolved administrations?

Strong Regional Coordination

34. As detailed earlier local programmes in the North East are well advanced and strongly coordinated.Local authorities find themselves very vulnerable to the impact and eVects of climate change, due to thewide-ranging role and remit authorities have, such as in planning, housing and transport. However, thispresents an opportunity as local government is ideally placed to lead the challenge. Seizing the initiative issomething that local government in the North East have done, and united many partners in resolving totackle climate change.

35. A prime example of the level of coordination that can take place locally and regionally, is the recentsigning of the North East Declaration on Climate Change with the Association, on behalf of all 25 NorthEast local authorities, along with a range of partners from the public, private and voluntary sectors.

36. A further sign of the strong coordination that takes place was demonstrated through the Associationsupporting a major conference earlier this year, organised by the leading fuel poverty charity NationalEnergy Action and sponsored by the Improvement Partnership for North East Local Government.“Leading Energy EYcient Communities” raised awareness of the issue of energy eYciency and how actionsand behaviours from the top down can lead the way to real change.

37. Therefore, the programmes of adaptation towards climate change in the North East are particularlywell advanced and strongly coordinated. Strong commitment exists across the various sectors whichrecognises the impact they have on the environment, the benefits to be made from tackling climate changeand the positive role they can play in engaging the hearts and minds of people across the region.

Support for adaptation

38. As part of these aims, the Association feels that there is a whole range of support for local authoritiesto engage with, and utilise the expertise of. The example of the conference held by National Energy Actiondemonstrated the support that existed, with funding from the Improvement Partnership for North EastLocal Government, to raise awareness and inform local authorities managers on how to initiate action fromthe top down.

39. The Carbon Trust also oVer support to local authorities, which they outlined in discussions with theAssociation’s Climate Change Task and Finish Group. As a result of these discussions, the Group haverecommended that any remaining North East local authorities that have not already adopted the CarbonTrust’s Carbon Management Programme, do so at the earliest opportunity. This ensures that localauthorities are supported by technical and change management support and guidance, to deliver reductionsin their carbon emissions from the Carbon Trust and the support they have already provided in the regionhas been of great benefit to local authorities.

40. Within the North East and indeed across the whole of the UK, fuel poverty is a particular issue ofconcern for local authorities. Within the region approximately 450,000 homes require cavity wall insulationand a further 500,000 require loft insulation. An estimated £300 million of investment is required over 10years for traditional insulation measures. By gaining consensus and support across the region, the North


East Homes insulation Partnership (NEHIP) is confident of being able to draw significant amounts offunding into the region to achieve its objectives. The Climate Change Task and Finish Group, on behalf ofall 25 local authorities have committed to support NEHIP in its objectives.

Support for local authorities

41. During its work, the Group was also advised that there are many initiatives and organisations acrossthe region whom can be of enormous benefit to local authorities in tackling climate change. These includethe Domestic Energy Solutions project “Go Warm” which is looking to cut fuel poverty and increase energyeYciency for up to 150,000 homes in the region and reduce CO2 emissions by up to 100,000 tonnes a year.

42. The Group also recognised the need for local authorities to work more closely with the EnvironmentAgency which has a significant role to play in adaptation. The Group also heard from the Energy SavingTrust, which has developed a regional network and brokerage service providing energy advice and guidanceto all markets, domestic households, local authorities and house builders. Working with a range of deliverypartners to ensure that services are available to all households, the Group recognised the need for localgovernment to work collaboratively to tackle fuel poverty.

43. Within the North East region there are also several ground-breaking and successful initiatives thatoVer advice and support to improve energy eYciency and reduce energy consumption, increasing thepercentage of energy consumed from renewable sources. The Association is undertaking to champion theNorth East as a key location for the new and renewable energy industry based on these initial projects. Localgovernment has a major role to play in promoting these opportunities, which are oVered by organisationssuch as the New and Renewables Energy Centre (NaREC) in Blyth and RENEW Tees Valley.

44. As stated above in response to question 1 the Association would urge Government to ensure thatorganisations such as these are fully supported in their actions, and that the expertise they bring is utilised.

Q6. How should the Committee on Climate Change reflect the interests and needs of the diVerent levels ofgovernment across the UK?

Independence and transparency

45. The Association of North East Councils supports the establishment of a Committee on ClimateChange. Such a body is important if the challenging targets set out in the Government’s Climate ChangeBill, of 60% reduction in CO2 emissions are to be achieved. As the principal role of the Committee, as setout in the legislation, is to advise the Secretary of State on carbon emissions, it is essential that localgovernment plays a leading role on the Committee. We consider the committee’s advisory function to beincredibly important in helping to determine how the long term targets will be achieved, and developingoptions/ scenarios and the long term trajectories. The Committee should be available to provide transparentand objective advice and guidance to all sectors of UK society.

46. Its independent status and transparency of operation will play a crucial role in securing credibilityand buy in from all sectors of UK society in striving to deliver the 2050 CO2 emissions targets. In addition,we feel that the Committee should be politically accountable rather than the proposed unaccountableCommittee, and that it should also hold some form of responsibility for monitoring procedure eg SelectCommittee.

Role of local government

47. As noted earlier, government ministers have acknowledged the central role that local authorities haveto play in tackling climate change. Furthermore, local government is the closest branch of government tocommunities, who have equally as important a role in reducing carbon emissions and adapting to the eVectsof climate change. Therefore, in representing the views of people, local government clearly has a strong roleto play in the Committee on Climate Change.

48. Whilst the Bill discussed the need to incorporate the contributions of devolved administrations,surprisingly there is no reference to the role of local government as the accountable and local level ofgovernment in this process. Local government in the North East contributes over £8 billion to the economy.It has the will and the ability to directly deliver and influence the achievement of the proposed UK targets(see section on “Other responses or comments”).

49. We would urge Government to consider further the sectoral contributions (statutory and nonstatutory role) of local government before finalising the factors and indeed the membership of the ClimateChange Committee. In addition, we would urge Government to ensure that local government is involvedin developing the targets and flexibilities and that it has the necessary budget to deliver the national targets.

50. The work which local government in the North East has led in confronting climate changedemonstrates the pressing case for this work to be fed into the Committee on Climate Change. TheAssociation believes the level of engagement, collaboration, innovation and commitment to the challengein the North East demonstrates the ability of the region to lead the way. Therefore, we would wish to see the


Committee on Climate Change undertake to ensure the views and work within each region are considered asa matter of course in its duties. It would allow the sharing of good practice and ensure that collectively theUnited Kingdom can reduce the impact of climate change.

Q7. What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do the diVerent levels of government havesuYcient powers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? Whatpolicies are working well?

Communication

51. The principal barriers to greater action include motivation amongst the diVerent sectors and ensuringthat communication and dialogue can take place, to ensure that collaborative working can take place. This isan essential barrier that needs to be overcome to facilitate organisations working, complementing one othersactions and sharing each others experiences. Local government alone can make a diVerence to reversing theimpact of climate change, working collaboratively across diVerent sectors, the impact of the leadershipdisplayed by local government can be immense.

52. Without question, scientific evidence supports the view that climate change is making an impact.Fortunately one of the key barriers to greater action, is now beginning to be removed. Before any actionneeds to be taken, there needs to be recognition of the challenge posed by climate change and a resolutionto take necessary steps to overcome the consequences of climate change at the present time and in the future.

53. From this recognition, actions building on this commitment, and utilising the skills and knowledge,real positive action can take place. The example of actions being taken in the North East, led by localauthorities is evidence of the success that can come from overcoming the barriers that prevent decisiveaction.

Media engagement

54. From the example of the North East, the single most successful practice and policy that has beenundertaken is the engagement of the local and regional media. Combined with the collaborative working,which has been highlighted already, this has enabled a single and sustained consistent message to beconveyed to the people in the region, whom have an important role to play in the actions required to lessenthe impact of the changing climate.

Engagement with young people

55. In particular, it has been recognised in the region that it’s absolutely vital to engage with the mediato attract and engage with arguably the most important group of people in the community when it comesto mitigating and adapting to climate change; young people. Central to this has been the recent debate withyoung people—which provided them with an opportunity to question elected politicians about their role intackling climate change, whilst ensuring that their views were heard and politicians were able to recognisewhat’s important to young people.

56. It has also been recognised that North East local government has a tremendous opportunity to raisethe awareness and understanding of climate change within schools. This has been developed through theregional “Climate Change Schools Project” which includes local government and other partners such as theScience Learning Centre North East. The aim of this initiative is to deliver and implement a standardisedpackage of climate change resources for schools and opportunities for development amongst teachers in alllocal authority areas.

Carbon Trading

57. The Climate Change Bill introduced the concept of carbon trading schemes. The Association, in itsresponse to the Draft Climate Change Bill endorsed this principle. However, the Association would urge,however, that the flexibilities of the system are made on a long term basis, and not short term, reactiveresponses. Consideration must be given to the impact and costs associated with the implementation of suchmeasures. Therefore, they must both be transparent and robust where necessary, with a limited life span.


Q8. What impact will the new Planning Policy Statement on climate change have on emissions reductions andwork on adaptation? How are the so called “Merton rules” aVected? How might other planning guidance bechanged to reduce emissions?

58. The Association supports the new Planning Policy Statement (PPS) which places the need for localplans to have strong carbon ambitions and targets. During its work, the Climate Change Task and FinishGroup recognised the importance of new build in reducing the impact of emissions on the environment.

59. Furthermore, the emphasis in the PPS on renewable energy is a move that the Association endorses.As previously discussed, the North East has the ability to lead the way in renewable energy, and the focuswithin the new PPS for local authorities to consider low carbon energy and renewable options is a move thatlocal government in the region welcomes.

“Merton rules”

60. As part of this the Association welcomes the news that the “Merton Rules” are being enhanced bythe new Planning Policy Statement (PPS) on climate change. The Task and Finish Group considered therole of renewable energy sources during its work and found that the North East region, which provided somuch of the carbon fuel our nation’s industrial strength was built on, has the potential to lead the way inthe new and renewable energy revolution. The North East already possesses a proud history of sustainable,renewable energy and possesses excellent examples of wind, wave and solar power, which we need tocontinue to develop and encourage. The Task and Finish Group discussed renewable energy in the contextof energy eYciency and the potential economic benefits to the region. The Association is committed to thegreater use of renewable energy and the promotion of energy eYciency as two key components in the battleto tackle climate change and recognises that local authorities need to work together, cross-boundary, toensure that opportunities can be fully exploited.

Energy consumption and use

61. In light of its energy consumption, local government needs to fully consider the potential use ofrenewable energy to ensure that the sector is better placed to reduce its dependency on energy sources thatcontribute to climate change, and at the same time, help to make a significant contribution to the energyeYciency of its housing stock and buildings. In light of this, the Association welcomes this recognition fromGovernment in the PPS for local authorities’ role in making use of renewable energy sources.

62. In gathering evidence, the Task and Finish Group was advised that there needed to be a moreconsistent approach to renewable energy solutions across the region’s local authorities. At the planningstage of new developments; an approach which engages with developers to ensure that a commonmethodology and language is used when councils are considering the most eVective energy solutions forrespective sites. The Group was informed of the “micro-renewables toolkit” that will assist planners anddevelopers to embed renewable energy sources within new developments. This had been led by the New andRenewable Energy Centre (NaREC) working with the region’s local authority planning oYcers to develop afunctional web-based toolkit that would assist in the assessment and suitability of renewable energy options.

63. As statutory planning authorities, councils are instrumental in maximising the planning potential intheir localities, through their ability to reduce carbon emissions of new homes and buildings, but also toensure that the impact of changing weather patterns are considered and embedded into local and regionalplanning frameworks. As well as enforcing existing powers, additional powers may be needed by localauthorities to successfully tackle climate change, such as promoting the local development of micro-generation and eYciency standards.

64. Whilst some adaptation measures, such as not building on flood plains can be easily implemented,there are other issues which local authorities have no control over, such as surface water flooding causedby, for example, individuals paving over front gardens and areas of land, resulting in surface water beingunable to drain eVectively, potentially leading to serious flooding. Local authorities currently have limitedjurisdiction (with the exception of conservation areas and local development frameworks) to enforceplanning consents for individual driveways, but they can play a role in educating citizens about the impactof their actions and providing advice and guidance to ensure solutions are provided.

Q10. What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central governmentsupport for sharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, SalixFinance, the Carbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust play in providing support?

65. As previously stated in response to question 6, the Association believes that best practice could beshared through the Committee on Climate Change, which would be able to oVer advice and expertise tosectors and regions in improving their performance in climate change. It would also provide an opportunityto, on a national level, share best practice through the networks established across sectors.


66. The best method through which to share best practice on a wider level is through engaging with localand regional press. The media has a fundamentally important role in communicating positive messagesabout climate change to a mass audience. Within the North East the ncjMedia campaign provides anexcellent basis on which to develop a regional wide understanding of environmental issues through thepromotion of a consistent message. This campaign is already successful in that it is encouraging people tosave energy, persuading businesses and regional organisations to play their part in a greener future, as wellas galvanising communities into action.

67. Furthermore, from the North East, as detailed throughout this response, there is a wealth of goodpractice to be shared. The signing of the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change by all 25 localauthorities has been taken a step further through the North East Declaration on Climate Change, acommitment on a regional level by the diVerent sectors and bodies within the region.

68. In terms of fuel poverty, the North East has committed to eradicating this from the region’s housingthrough the North East Fuel Poverty Declaration, an initiative which is being supported in the region bythe work of Energy Saving Trust, the North East Home Insultation Partnership and Domestic EnergySolutions. The Association feels that the role played by organisations such as these are vital to the localgovernment sector in adapting to climate change and overcoming the challenges posed by adapting to itsimplications and consequences. Their expertise can add considerable value to the work of local authoritiesand the live of people within communities across the North East. The Association believes that otherorganisations such as IDeA and the UK Climate Impacts Programme can help share the good knowledgeand good experience of adapting to climate change, making sure it is disseminated around the country, andpromoted on the international stage.

8 January 2008

Witnesses: Ms Christine Seaward, Environment Futures Manager, Hampshire County Council, Mr BobFiddik, Sustainability Manager, Southwark Council and Ms Hilary Knox, Deputy Director, Association ofNorth East Councils, gave evidence.

Q47 Chairman: Good morning and welcome to theCommittee. As I think it may be the first time youhave appeared before us, certainly in my time, wouldyou just like to introduce yourselves so we knowexactly who you are?Ms Knox: Good morning. I am Hilary Knox,Deputy Director with the Association of North EastCouncils, which is a cross-Party organisationrepresenting councils in Northumberland, Tyne andWear, County Durham and the Tees Valley. My rolewithin the Association of North East Councils isvery broad. I have a role in relation to a number ofareas of policy. My professional background is incommunications, media relations and externalaVairs.Mr Fiddik: Good morning. I am Bob Fiddik and Iam the Sustainability Manager at the LondonBorough of Southwark. My role there has evolvedover the last few years. I started oV my professionalbackground in energy management, and I still havea role in buying utilities for the Council; but I ammore getting involved in major regenerationprojects, and trying to steer low carbon developmentthrough regeneration projects.Ms Seaward: My name is Christine Seaward and Iam from Hampshire County Council. My rolewithin the Council is as Environment FuturesManager. What that means is looking at the longer-term implications of the decisions that we make.Hampshire County Council is involved in its ownprogramme of work, particularly on adaptation. Wehave recently had a commissioner of inquiry of ourown looking at what these issues mean forHampshire; and we are an active member within theSouth East Climate Change Partnership.

Q48 Chairman: Thank you very much. We aregrateful to you for coming in. Could I begin with ageneral question about where you see the mainobstacles to more eVective action on climate changeat the local level?Ms Knox: Chairman, I think perhaps one of the not“obstacles” but fundamental challenges inaddressing climate change is in winning hearts andminds; encouraging citizens and communities tomake lifestyle changes and choices that cumulativelywill make a real diVerence. The approach that isbeing adopted by councils in the North East ofEngland is very much around how local councillorscan exercise their strong leadership role, engagingeVectively in partnerships, and also engaging withyoung people through debate and with the media toget across a message that climate change is real andthat it is happening now. One of the particularactions I wanted to bring to your attention thismorning was the way in which all 25 councils cross-Party have come together to work in partnership asa sector, which we believe is quite unique. We are thefirst region to have signed a North East Declarationon Climate Change, which involves not just thepublic sector but also a range of private sectororganisations.Ms Seaward: Could I oVer a couple of thoughtsthere. One would be the lack of powers where thereare some of the biggest impacts: for example,flooding and coastal defence; and reducing CO2

emissions from existing building stock. I know wehave got carbon reduction targets coming in, butactually we have got a lot within the building stockthat sits there and it is quite a challenge to sort thatout. The powers there are, at best, unclear andprobably non-existent for local authorities.


22 January 2008 Ms Christine Seaward, Mr Bob Fiddik and Ms Hilary Knox

Mr Fiddik: Certainly I would echo those two.Certainly behaviour change issues are a diYcult oneto tackle but through partnership I think it issomething local authorities and their local strategicpartnerships are just learning how to do properly. Ithink a particular weakness in our own localstrategic partnership is that they tend to be verymuch public sector based; and it is very diYcultgetting engagement of the business sector. An issuecertainly for us, speaking as an urban localauthority, is that the majority of our emissions, 85%,come from the built sector, from buildings; of that49% of the direct emissions within our boroughcome from non-domestic buildings; so it is notactually the domestic sector that predominates forus. I think behaviour change takes a long time toeVect and we do not seem to have that time, as far asI am concerned. One issue is actually making surethe systems that we are putting into our buildings,and also existing buildings retrofitting, aredelivering low carbon. I believe that the current set-up of the energy infrastructure that we have in thiscountry is not really ideally suited to doing that.Speaking from an urban perspective, it is delivering,quite frankly, combined heat and power for us. Wehave done endless studies on this and that isprobably the most beneficial measure we can take;but it is incredibly diYcult doing that in the contextof an existing gas network and existing electricitynetwork.

Q49 Chairman: It seems to us that some of the mosteVective action at a local level has been the result ofan individual who has been very determined to drivethe agenda forward. How can we translate that sortof good achievement, good practice, into a moreconsistent approach across local government; orperhaps we cannot and we need more goodindividuals?Ms Seaward: We have done some work looking atthat type of model. I think it is finding ways tosupport what we call “champions”, also what otherpeople call “wilful individuals”; because that doesseem to be where change happens; where you have achampion who steps outside or puts that extra eVortin. My suggestion would be a way of supportingwhat we have called “an ecosystem of champions”because it works. You can have the policies and thepractices to support that, and that is a stage that isvery important, but it is almost that you need thepioneer. I do not know whether there are othermodels, but certainly that is a successful model thatis replicated in many diVerent places.Mr Fiddik: I would certainly add that the newperformance framework is going to be vital in this aswell. I think for a long time many of us have thoughtthat actually having indicators that we are measuredon, that relate directly to climate change, will be animportant driver. We certainly fully support thatmove of having the new indicators and theperformance framework. I think you will probablycome on to questions about the actual indicators,how they are constructed and whether they willdeliver any of those outputs but certainly that is agood start.

Q50 Mr Caton: The Local Government AssociationCommission on Climate Change identified fiveparticular areas where councils could make progressin: adaptation, existing housing stock, planning,transport and procurement. Do you agree with thosepriorities; and should they be added to? How areyour councils active in delivering in this areas?Mr Fiddik: Broadly, yes, I do agree on thoseparticular areas. Again for us our Climate ChangeStrategy has been divided into three broad areas: ourown operations; action through our services; andthen there is the wider partnership activity throughthe LSP etc. Broadly that covers those particularareas. I think it will be diVerent from local authorityto local authority. For instance, as an inner Londonborough I would say something like 70%1 of theLondon Borough of Southwark is undergoing somesort of regeneration. In that case planning policy isof paramount importance. That does bring up theissue of skills: are the skills there when developerscome forward with plans? Do we have the rightpeople at the other end checking those plans?Conversely, developers themselves, do they have theskills to deliver low carbon developments? At themoment there are so many major projects in thepipeline, from the Olympics, to Building Schools forthe Future etc, that there really is not the skill sectorto deliver low carbon projects. Certainly ourexperience is that at the first meeting with thedeveloper they often have their Team C graduates,as it were, who do not actually have much experienceof delivering low carbon developments; and we haveto eVectively go back and ask them to bring up theirTeam A.Ms Seaward: I think the only other one I would addwould be infrastructure—it is a big issue for us—whether that is roads, railways or drainage, all thattype of infrastructure. If it is not a priority area, apriority for action, I think other things will notfollow.Ms Knox: I think central government policy has set avery clear policy framework on what it expects fromlocal government as a sector to help deliver itsvision. In that regard we have had running for thepast six months a Task and Finish Group which ismember-led cross-Party, which operates rather likea select committee, and has been taking evidence onhow local government in the North East can work inpartnership across a whole range of issues that willfundamentally address climate change, which hasresulted in 45 recommendations. I would very muchlike to submit this as additional evidence to you.2 Itwill be considered for endorsement this Friday, butthe recommendations are very action-orientated,and will have significant impact on the ground. Ithink we have to recognise that as large estatemanagers, and as significant procurers of servicesand goods, local councils do have an important roleto play in this whole area, particularly in relation toprocurement of goods and services, which I wouldlike to highlight as being particularly important.

1 Note by Witness: Currently, 40% of Southwark isundergoing regeneration, not 70%, as stated during the oralevidence session.

2 Not printed.



Councils in the North East spend something in theregion of £8 billion per annum on procuring goodsand services. A diVerent proportion of that could betargeted towards sustainable procurement thatcould make a real diVerence. I would also like tosuggest that local government can be supported in itsattempts to eradicate fuel poverty, which isfundamentally linked to energy eYciency of homes.In the North East region we do have a programmefor achieving that, but it will require something like£300 million of investment over the next ten years.That is an area where I think local governmentwould wish to see central government supporting itseVorts on.

Q51 Mr Caton: You made a valid point aboutvariation amongst local authorities and, therefore,inevitably diVerent priorities. The experience in theNorth East is that you have at least have found somecommon priorities, by the sound of it. Thinkingnationwide, are there some areas where the issues areso important that every local authority should beprioritising?Mr Fiddik: As my colleague just mentioned,procurement is a common area across the whole ofthe public sector. I think one issue there, which isperhaps an issue for the whole of the public sector,is we know that getting the best environmentalproduct, service, building or whatever actuallydepends on having a full whole-life cost of thatparticular service in your procurement. In otherwords, not just the up-front capital cost; you shouldbe evaluating the ongoing running costs given thatmost environmental preferables, buildings, devices,pieces of equipment, generally end up with lowerrunning costs but they might incurred additionalhigher capital costs. Putting that into practice I thinkhas not been widespread across the whole of thepublic sector. One of the issues which is a problemis the way we arrange our budgets and our fundingstreams. This is clearly an issue for local authorityfinance oYcers—that the capital budgets are oftenvery separate from the revenue budgets. It is notusually possible to transfer the revenue savings youwould incur back to the capital budget to buy a moreexpensive building or more expensive product. Ithink that is also an issue for central government,because the funding streams that are passed down tous are also arranged in that way.

Q52 Martin Horwood: There is at least one project ofregenerating from a national level if not from anational government, which is the Carbon TrustPartnership for Renewables which is designed to getsome of those capital costs out of the private sector.Are you aware of that initiative? Do you think it isgoing to make a diVerence? Do you think it is a goodroute to start to go down?Mr Fiddik: Yes, in short. I think any pump-primingof especially emerging technology is always going tobe very welcome. I think I would still highlightinitiatives such as the Low Carbon BuildingsProgramme. There have been problems and, quitefrankly, at the end of the day, if you are a building

purchaser and you are trying to put something likephotovoltaics up on your roof even with, say, 50%funding, the pay-back time is still incredibly long.

Q53 Martin Horwood: That was a grantsprogramme. A Partnership for Renewables is aboutgetting private sector finance in, is it not?Mr Fiddik: Yes, absolutely. I think initiatives likethat are absolutely essential across the board, andalso for domestic customers as well. I think the HolyGrail in providing low carbon energy services is theprovision of energy services. That we move from justsimply selling units of electricity and gas to actuallyproviding a service. Yes, the private sector will comealong and finance the photovoltaics on the roof andthen you will pay back from your energy savingsover a course of time. It is still an emerging area. Ido not see any sign of that quickly appearing on themarket. Certainly if there is pump-priming andschemes like that available I think it is an essentialstep.

Q54 Mr Stuart: Hilary, if I could just you back toyour remarks about tackling fuel poverty and the£300 million. Could you tell us precisely what thatwould provide for, and perhaps comment on theWarm front and current funding. I think that is animportant part of this report. There are many areasthat are expensive and hard to get into the system,but energy eYciency is economically sound, as wellas having all the other benefits.Ms Knox: I would like to preface my comments bysaying this is an area where councils are seeking todrive their own improvement. We do have a NorthEast Improvement Partnership which was set upthree years ago as a result of government funding of£5 million to help local authorities improve theirperformance across a whole range of areas. Weorganised a conference last year on energy eYcientcommunities which was sponsored by theImprovement Partnership, which we ran inconjunction with National Energy Action and theEnergy Saving Trust. That, first of all, helped tocreate awareness amongst all 25 councils of theimportance of this issue, which means that it is nowright at the forefront of the agenda. I am pleased tosay that there has been a very successful submissionto the Energy EYciency Fund by an organisationcalled Domestic Energy Solutions in the North East,who have received a tranche of funding which hasenabled it to get a programme up and running,which was rolled out at the end of last year fordelivery by 2010; which will fundamentally help toprovide wall insulation, cavity insulation and loftinsulation for homes in the North East that requiresome support.

Q55 Mr Stuart: All homes, or are we talking aboutcouncil homes and social housing only?Ms Knox: It is a combination. Clearly in terms of theareas I represent we are dealing with a lot of olderhousing stock, indeed properties in rural areas aswell as urban areas. Housing in rural areas doespresent a diVerent set of problems to address. We do



have something in the region of 450,000 homes in theregion requiring cavity wall insulation, and a further500,000 requiring loft insulation.

Q56 Dr Turner: Like a lot of the old lags in this Place,I did my time in local government as a councillorbefore coming here, so I am very familiar with theconstraints on councils caught between statutoryduties and tightly controlled funding, so funding isquite important. People like Mr Jones, with theirhistory at Woking and the GLC, have to be highlycreative given the current situation. How usefulwould it be if we reformed to some degree the systemof local government funding in order to give councilsfar more flexibility, so that they could build energyeYciency et cetera into their policy actions? Whatwould you like to see? You have a blank canvass!Mr Fiddik: I am just thinking of our specific case. InSouthwark we are in the middle of setting up asimilar scheme to Alan Jones’s in Working; it is forthe Elephant and Castle regeneration and we wantto set up a energy service company. Essentially itwould be running a concession, because we are notthe main consumers of energy in that area. There isthe registered social landlord sector; private sectordwellings; and a significant commercial sector. Theidea is that it will be a combined heat and powerplant with private wires; but we are also adding insome other areas of infrastructure which I think arequite innovative. There will eVectively be agroundwater/green water supply; so buildings willhave dual plumbing. They will have untreatedgroundwater for flushing toilets; and there areobviously some carbon savings in there as well. Inaddition to that there is data cabling. In setting upthat it is fair to say that the Council would prefer totake a risk-free approach, and for that to bedelivered more or less by the private sector totally. Itwould be a private sector company running as aconcession. What the council brings to the table isour planning policy. What the private sector partnerneeds is the certainty that they will have revenuecoming from heat sales; so we are using section 106agreements to oblige the developers to link into thesystem. We are lucky in that area that we own asignificant proportion of land, and therefore canhave even more cast iron guarantees there will berevenue through our land sale agreements obligingthe plot developers to link up. In the ideal world Iwould like to have the local authority to have alarger stake in that vehicle; because the real carbonsavings come not necessarily from that developmentbut from what surrounds it from existing stock. Mycolleague mentioned existing homes, especially solidwall buildings, listed buildings for instance; it is verydiYcult to add insulation to those to actually bringcarbon emissions down. Combined heat and powercan help with that. I suspect that we will not get thatmassive development outside the development areawithout a certain amount of pump-priming of publicmoney. You ask what ideally I would like: how doyou make it less risk for a local government head offinance oYcer to actually put some money into avehicle like that? I am not sure. Ideally that is whatI would like to be the outcome of that.

Q57 Dr Turner: That is right. You have justdescribed the sort of creativity which is needed tofight your way through the current system. It is anexcellent example. In fact I live there myself! We dohave central government funds available to localgovernment for specific programmes; admittedly, incomparison to the scale of local government finance,they are miniscule. Have you tried to use thesetargeted funds? Have they been of any use? Wouldyou like to see this expanded? What do you think isneeded to make a real impact?Mr Fiddik: Unfortunately I think the case withcombined heat and power, which is our particularsolution there, there is at the moment very limitedfunding for that particular technology. In fact theonly scheme, which was community energy,obviously has folded with no intention of it being setup again. I would like to see some form ofcommunity energy started up again. In terms ofwhether the private sector will put money into heatnetworks—because eVectively you are competingagainst a pre-existing gas network which wasobviously put in there more or less by the publicpurse—if you are trying to drive private sectordevelopment down that path on heat networks, youhave to deal with the central item. You have to makeit more diYcult for, say, a private sectororganisation to build a heat-dumping centralisedplant. At the moment it is just more cost-eVective forthem to build, say, a combined cycle gas turbine inthe middle of nowhere, connected to no heatnetworks, at most 50% eYcient. Therefore, you doneed some form of stick, either a tax on dumped heator just a simple moratorium on new heat-dumpingplant, and that would drive investment intocombined heat and power, for instance.

Q58 Dr Turner: You have just brought me neatly towhat I was going to as you next, which is: there arecertain, not statutory demands, sadly, on localgovernment, such as HECA and so on, but there aresome powers that councils have got. Do you thinkcouncils at large are making full use of the powersthat they have got to influence climate change?Mr Fiddik: I guess I would have to say, no. Again,it is probably the well-being powers—although theyhave been around for a few years now, I think theknowledge of how to use them and what we shouldbe using them for is still not widespread. It wasprecisely because of those powers that I purposelywrote into our community strategy, knowing that ifthe setting up of a local energy service company,specifically looking at combined heat and power,was written into our community strategy then wewould have the power to do that at a later date.EVectively, we have made use of that power to dowhat we are doing now.

Q59 Dr Turner: How helpful would it be to councilsif those powers were to be strengthened? If so, howwould you like to see them strengthened, and wouldyou like to see any additional powers?Mr Fiddik: Speaking personally, and I have put thisin the written evidence I provided to the Committee,I would like to see some form of energy planning role



given to local authorities, and for it to be mandatory.This would cover looking at what are the localrenewable resources; and how can we do heatplanning? For instance, as I mentioned before, in theexisting stock you may have a large business existingbuilding sitting next to a school, next to a housingestate, and at the moment it is very diYcult to linkup these buildings together perhaps with a newdevelopment that is happening beside. A lot of ourpolicies are actually focussed on individual buildingsor, alternatively, on the large-scale other end of thesystem which is putting power into the system; andthere is very little looking at neighbourhoodapproaches. I think an energy planning power wouldbe very useful. It is also something which has beenrecommended in a report the DCLG commissionedfrom the UK Green Building Council, which cameup with the conclusion that we have already lookedat the route to zero carbon homes; when you look atzero carbon non-domestic buildings it is even morediYcult because there is so much more electricityuse. Therefore, trying to achieve that on a building-by-building basis is extremely diYcult. One of theirrecommendations is precisely that the localauthority should be engaged in energy planning.

Q60 Dr Turner: Hilary, you were talking about theproblems of encouraging behavioural changeamongst local residents. What are your feelings, anyof you, about the use of fiscal incentives to help thisprocess, such as council tax reductions in exchangefor investing in energy eYciency measures and soon? Have you any experience of using this kind ofmeasure? What do you feel about it? What kind ofmeasures, beyond the one I have just mentioned, doyou think you might consider?Ms Knox: Before I respond specifically to that, mayI just make a comment in response to your earlierquestion about: do local authorities exercisesuYciently the powers that they have? I am not surethat the Association of North East Councils sharesin entirety the views expressed by Bob, in the sensethat we very much welcome the Government’s newPPS planning and climate change document, whichwe will be considering the full implications of;because that does potentially give local authoritiesmuch greater powers. Also it is really important toreflect on the Government’s sub-national review andthe local government White Paper which recognisespowers and actions at a range of diVerent spatiallevels, not least at a very local level, through LocalArea Agreements, Local Strategic Partnerships andMulti Area Agreements. The indicators on climatechange that have been introduced into the newperformance framework do provide regulatorypowers for local authorities working in partnershipwith those organisations that it has a duty to consultwith and work with to take forward some of theactions around climate change. We very muchwelcome the recognition of local government’s rolein that scenario. You are talking about fiscal powersand additional powers, and I think from ourperspective it is about the carrot and stick approach.I would like to come back to the issue of winninghearts and mind and, if I may, to highlight the

importance of young people as part of the solution.It has been very encouraging to see the extent towhich this is right at the top of young people’sagenda. Recently in December we had 200 youngpeople at St James’s Park for a debate and as acitizen, as a representative of local government, Iwas very reassured and impressed by howknowledgeable young people are about this issue.They are in a position to actually create that cultural,behavioural and attitudinal change that really needsto happen. Also the North East is leading the way interms of the first ever Climate Change SchoolsProject, which has support from DurhamUniversity; from the Environment Agency; andDefra has a representative on the steering groupalongside the Association of North East Councils.That is about providing a tool kit, a standardisedpackage of actions and behaviours measures thatcan be adopted by schoolteachers and by children aspart of Key Stages 3 and 4 of the curriculum in everyschool in the North East. It is not yet somethingwhich has mainstreamed into the nationalcurriculum, but if the pilot project is successful thenpotentially it is something that the Governmentmight look towards in terms of integration of thoseprinciples into the National Curriculum. Theposition our politicians are adopting right now isthat their local leadership role as elected councillorsis perhaps much more important than looking atfiscal measures; but not to say that we would not, aspart of the work we are doing, look at what some ofthose fiscal tools might be.

Q61 Jo Swinson: I was interested that Bobmentioned the well-being powers and just wanted toprobe a little further, particularly to hear Christineand Hilary’s views on what is happening withinHampshire and the North East. What impact havethose powers made? Are they being used to supportsustainable energy and other projects? Are there anylimitations to using those powers?Ms Seaward: We welcome the powers that are withinthat package. Certainly the role of the countycouncil being a medium within the region and withinour own county it is important to us, and also to ourcitizens. To reflect that through well-being powers issomething we are striving to do. The clever bit hereis joining it all up, because all of these strands makesense in their own way; but actually if we are going toget a cohesive response to climate change we actuallyhave to link up across several disciplines. The well-being powers are welcome but if they are used inisolation they are not going to bring the roundedresult that we would like to see. That is also reflectedin the work we have done on behaviour change aspart of our ESPACE project because what we havelooked at there is that climate change oVers a newchallenge to influencing the way people change theirbehaviour, or in the way their attitudes are held.Some of the work we have done might be of interestto the Committee because it actually looks at three,four or fives steps you would need to take in order tobe eVective in the round. Going back to where youwere, well-being powers are welcome but they have



to be linked up with other roles and responsibilitiesof the council. We have to do that internally and wehave to do that within partnerships as well.Ms Knox: Local authorities have a strong role asplace-shapers, as recognised by Sir Michael Lyons,and we define place-shapers as having responsibilityfor the economic, social and environmental well-being of citizens and communities. In the context ofhow we might ensure that those principles areembedded in what we do regionally as well as locally,Government as you know has recently through thesub-national review given a responsibility to localgovernment for the scrutiny of a single integratedregional strategy. We do currently have a regionaleconomic strategy which is the role of the RDA OneNorth East to progress. Going forward we wouldanticipate that local government would have a keyrole to play working with one One North East, theRegional Development Agency, and other partnersto make sure that in addition to economicdevelopment, which is vitally important, we have theopportunity to bring about societal change, whichensures that the principles of environmental andsocial well-being are integrated into policies thataVect citizens and communities.

Q62 Jo Swinson: Do you think the fact the qualityof life indicators are voluntary, compared to all theother mass of indicators that local government hasto report on, has aVected the amount of weight givento the well-being powers?Ms Seaward: I think the way we have picked it up asan authority is actually it has become one of ourcorporate priorities. Maybe in other areas wherethey have not picked it up as a priority that might bethe case; but certainly in Hampshire it is a centraldriving force to our own carbon policies.

Q63 Mark Lazarowicz: Overall, do councils have thenecessary skills, capacity and indeed staV resourcesto address climate change? I realise it will obviouslyvary from authority to authority. Overall, what isthe picture of diVerent areas where there are gapsand local government has got to address this issue?Mr Fiddik: Again, I think this issue will be highlyvariable from region to region and certainly withinLondon amongst local authorities. I mentioned theimportance of planning. Planning and buildingcontrol oYcers are in short supply; energymanagement oYcers are in short supply; there is amajor skills gap there. One of the areas where we arefortunate in London is with our cooperation withthe Greater London Authority and the LondonDevelopment Agency. There is the London EnergyPartnership which is a cross-sectoral group thatessentially tries to implement the Mayor’s energystrategy for London, and that does have specificworking groups looking at the skills gap. It is amajor problem; and it is something we have alsotried to address, not only an inner-London basis, butthrough our own LSP as well, because we arefortunate that we do have, within our borough,London South Bank University, for instance, whichdoes training of a significant proportion of buildingservice engineers. It is a large issue but I am not quite

sure how you can easily tackle it, given that there isan overall UK problem with people not going intoengineering subjects as a whole and building servicesas a whole. Yes, it is an issue. As I mentioned before,it is a problem from the supply side of the providers;from developers coming forward; it is a problem ofeven small-scale renewables installations wherethere are not the people with the skills to fit solarphotovoltaics or solar thermal. There are things youcan do. We have had projects which have looked totry and cross-train and say, “It’s much easier to getan electrician trained to install photovoltaics”; but Ithink what we have found so far is that they are notdoing that until they can see the demand there. Sothere is a bit of a chicken and egg issue there. For theplanners, I think the London Energy Partnershiphas made some progress by providing trainingsessions for planners. Actually that is something thathas worked very well on a London regional basis.We have had quite intensive training for ourplanners so they are skilled up; they are giventoolkits to understand; so when the developers comeforward with planning applications that they dounderstand what are the low carbon systems there.Ms Seaward: I would just like to add that capacityand skills, within our authority, is actually look atwhere climate change sits. It is still considered bymany people to be an environmental issue, so it getspriority consideration within those areas. What weare seeking to do is to place climate changeconsiderations at the heart of all policy making.That is quite a challenge. Somebody spoke earlierabout champions and wilful individuals, but weactually need those within our diVerent departmentsand our diVerent disciplines, so there is not thecapacity issue there. We also feel that we want to beable to develop solutions that are not reinventing thewheel at every stage; and that we can work withcentral government departments so that we canshare the expertise we have got and learn from otherpeople’s experience. That is an attempt to addressthe capacity and skills issue, but I certainly supportwhat has been said.

Q64 Mark Lazarowicz: What about the North Eastof England?Ms Knox: Three things really: firstly, we supporthaving a climate change champion at member andsenior oYcer level, so potentially the leader and chiefexecutive of every council, so that climate change, asChristine was saying, is not just the remit of theclimate change oYcer, or the person with it in theirjob title, but that climate change is embeddedthroughout the whole of councils’ organisationalplanning and operations; secondly, partnerships,really vitally important. Although we do recognisethat in local government we are continually drivingup our improvement and performance across awhole range of areas, and have funding and supportfrom central government to achieve that, as well asan appetite and drive to do that for ourselves, werecognise that there is a huge resource invested in anumber of our partners: the New and RenewableEnergy Centre (NaREC) in Blyth inNorthumberland is a world-class institution which is



looking at a range of diVerent new and renewableenergy technologies; and we are very much drawingon the resource they are able to oVer in terms ofsolutions for ways forward. We work very closelywith organisations like the Carbon Trust, with theEnvironmental Agency and with others. I think thepartnership working that is happening already is notonly achieving a consistency of approach and acommon message, but is allowing us to use thoseresources to help with the way we should go forward.We have not mentioned adaptation, Chairman. Iwonder if I might just mention this because it doessometimes feel a bit like the poor relation comparedwith mitigation measures. We have participated in apiece of work which is around a regional adaptationstudy, which will provide us with somerecommendations at the end of this month on howwe can be working not just as local councils but withother partners around managing flood risk, theimpact of weather changes for infrastructure and onpeople. That piece of work is being done by anorganisation called Royal Haskoning which has gotexpertise in this area. Again, it comes back toworking in partnership with organisations which dohave technical expertise and resource to bring.

Q65 Mark Lazarowicz: You mentioned the CarbonTrust and I am interested in knowing briefly, fromthose of you who wish to answer, how you assess thesupport you receive from what is now the CarbonTrust, EST and other national UK organisations.What more could they do to assist you as a localgovernment more generally in what you are doing inthis area?Mr Fiddik: We participated in the actual pilotCarbon Trust Support Programme and, again, itwas just starting oV and eVectively learning itself, Iguess. Obviously I do not have experience of thelater incarnations of the Carbon Trust SupportProgramme but, certainly from meetings I have hadwith other boroughs, that is particularly useful.Especially for those boroughs that have not quitegot their heads around what they need to tackle withclimate change, it provides some very useful tool kitsabout just sitting down, looking at their services,their operations, their partnership working andseeing more or less where they can make the firstquick wins. It has provided a very useful frameworkfor local authorities.Ms Seaward: We too were part of a pilot study withthe Carbon Trust. Rather than taking on specificallytheir plan and tools, we felt it was not entirelyappropriate as it stood to take that on board; but ithas been an inspiration to actually developsomething for our own measures. We are an uppertier authority so many of the tools are developedspecifically at a borough level or a district level.Nevertheless it was an inspiration to actually get ourenergy managers and so on providing and placingtheir own plans forward.Ms Knox: We are working very closely particularlywith the Energy Saving Trust, not just in terms of theactions to eradicate and address fuel poverty butcoming back to a theme I have mentioned a coupleof times around winning hearts and minds, about

education, awareness and understanding, buildingcapacity. They are working with us to produce aweb-based tool kit which will be rolled out across alllocal authorities, which will provide a resource toolfor elected members in terms of what support theycan access through Energy Saving Trust’s services.

Q66 Mark Lazarowicz: Finally, could I ask you toassess the significance of the NottinghamDeclaration to provide leadership, and what morecould be done to build upon that?Ms Knox: I think the Nottingham Declaration hasbeen very important in the North East in terms ofensuring a real commitment to getting every councilto have a climate change action plan. It is a verypublic declaration that this is vitally important tolocal government and sends out a very positive andcompelling message to the citizens and communitieswhom we are seeking to influence in terms ofencouraging them to make lifestyle changes andchoices that cumulatively will make a real diVerence.

Q67 Colin Challen: How consistent do you find thepolicy framework from central government to be?For example, if there is an emphasis on encouragingregional airport expansion that probably is going towin out against a local authority’s ability toprioritise policy on climate change, is it not? There isa choice. You may say it is a false choice but do youfeel there is consistency in the Government’s policyframework?Ms Knox: I think there is a high degree ofconsistency between central government policyframework in relation to this issue with a wide rangeof documents which are very clear about localgovernment’s role including: the climate changeprogramme; the Local Government White Paper;the Comprehensive Area Assessment; the SternReview; the Climate Change Bill; the Energy WhitePaper; the Government’s National Waste Strategy;and the latest PPS climate change. It is a very clearframework. There is a high degree of consistencybetween national and local actions and priorities.Specifically in relation to airport expansion, theAssociation of North East Councils in its currentmanifesto has pledged to support the sustainabledevelopment of both of the North East regionsairports recognising their economic, social andenvironmental aspects; very important for theeconomy of the region in terms of job creation,attraction of inward investment and inboundtourism. Local authorities do own 51% of the sharesin Newcastle Airport and 25% of the shares inDurham Tees Valley Airport. So there is always anopportunity for local authorities to have a veryclose, strong dialogue with airport operators; andcertainly Newcastle Airport—which is perhaps in adiVerent paradigm to some of the larger airports,such as Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted or perhapsBirmingham and Manchester—they have a veryresponsible approach towards the development ofthe airport. Newcastle has a climate change actionplan. So we do recognise that sustainability does



have those three strands, and we do attempt to workthrough regional and other partners to find anappropriate balance.

Q68 Colin Challen: That sounds very familiar in thesense that it sounds very similar to the Government’sown sustainable development indicators, where theenvironment tends to come bottom. Sustainabledevelopment is seen as the things you havementioned which, in the past, we have alwaysthought were good and still do: economicdevelopment, jobs, industry and so on, and people’smobility as well. Climate change really comesbottom of the list, does it not, because the expansionwill take place?Ms Knox: That was not what I said. I did not say thatclimate change does come bottom. I think what Iwas intending to convey was that there was animperative for us as local government, working withother partners, to ensure the sustainabledevelopment of both of the North East airports,which recognise that there are the three strands toconsider, and to get that balance right between all ofthe economic development benefits that flow fromhaving direct regional air services into key Europeandestinations. The North East is relatively peripheralin relation to global markets and does rely veryheavily on regional air service access to thosemarkets. I think that is consistent with nationalgovernment policy. The Eddington Report ontransport does highlight the importance of gatewaysin and out of the UK, with airports and ports beingvery important. However, as I said earlier, we dorecognise that there needs to be sustainabledevelopment and local authorities are in a positionto influence that.

Q69 Colin Challen: If the Government’s policyframework supports that view, and I guess you aresaying it does, how does that square with the calls ofmany people to improve the domestic rail network?Many of these flights will be to hubs like Heathrowor perhaps Manchester, short journeys which couldbe easily dealt with by rail. How can you square thetwo policies?Ms Knox: It is an absolutely fair question, and onewhich is currently the subject of debate in the regionin connection with sustainable transport, whereby asa region we recognise we need good road, sea and airlinks. Rail plays an important part in that equation.We have been keen to explore the possibility for highspeed rail, which has been very successful in otherparts of Europe particularly in Lille in France,linking Denmark and Malmo in Sweden. Lots ofevidence of high speed rail having strongenvironmental benefits. One of the things that theAssociation of North East Councils would urgecentral government to do is undertake a UK-widestudy which looks at the environmental, social andeconomic benefits of high speed rail.

Q70 Mr Stuart: You suggested there wasconsistency. The Environment Agency have told usthey think there are conflicting signals. Youmentioned in your list of marvellously coherent

policies coming down from central governmentwaste strategies, and yet we heard from Bob just nowabout the need to tax or find other ways of stoppingpower just venting oV heat; and yet we have localauthorities right across the country going ahead withbuilding incinerators, driven by a policy supposedlylinked to climate change to stop landfill, which willvent 65% of the energy up into the sky. In myconstituency, just to the east of Hull, there are vastcouncil estates which could do with being warmed,and there are horticultural businesses going bustbecause of the cost of heating their glasshouses; andyet Government policy seems to be leading toforcing the councils in that area to build incineratorswhich vent their heat oV. Is that really consistent?Mr Fiddik: Obviously I do not know about thatparticular individual case.

Q71 Mr Stuart: There are lots of them all over thecountry!Mr Fiddik: I think there are going to be inevitabletensions. Energy policy eVectively seems to bedivided between DBERR, DCLG and Defra and Ithink there will be inevitable tensions. Historicallythe DTI and DBERR have focussed on the price ofenergy, to get prices low to ensure security of supplyand obviously to increase competition, and that haseVectively filtered down to the regulator. Those arethe main aims of Ofgem. I think there has been somecall for Ofgem to have sustainable developmentwritten into its main aims, because it currently is not;it is more or less a secondary one. I think there isevidence, quite frankly, that the emphasis oncompetition and fuel switching is to some extent, Iwould argue, illusory from an energy buyer’sperspective. You do not get lower prices in theenergy market from competition, it is when you buyand how you buy, because the market is incrediblyvolatile and it is your decision on when you buy. Forthe domestic customer more or less they are at themercy of this volatile market at the end of the day. Ithink there does need to be a much greater emphasison this concept of energy services, of not just simplyselling units of energy but actually going in andsaying, “I’m can spend some capital inside yourhome, your business, to reduce energy demand”,and that then becomes a business proposition. Imentioned before this is the Holy Grail. TheGovernment has said they wish utility suppliers tobecome energy service companies but it is not thereyet. I suspect that that is partly to do withregulatory issues.

Q72 Mr Stuart: I just want to get clarity from thethree of you. The Climate Change Bill is goingthrough Parliament it sets targets for reductions for2020. Can we be clear, do you believe that localgovernment is in a position to help deliver its part ofthat target; and are you getting the clarity and,indeed, support from central government to deliverit? Yes or no, if you had to summarise it.Ms Seaward: Rather than clarity I think there isconfusion, and I think it is actually about whichpolicies have the most strength and which ones arethe priorities; and that is particularly when you look



at the economic policies for a region as opposed tothe adaptation to climate change issues. Where arethe priorities there? I think we are in a situationwhere we are having to argue and develop thosearguments so that the climate change issues have asimilar sort of weight.

Q73 Mr Stuart: I accept that, Christine, but thequestion was: there are all those things to be done,are we in a position, are you in a position, to deliverthe targets that are in the Climate Change Bill by2020 without a serious change of direction in termsof funding, in terms of regulation, in terms of drivefrom central government and the removal ofobstacles to getting there as far as you areconcerned?Ms Seaward: As far as I am concerned, no, but Ithink we are getting there. Particularly with thenational indicators and those targets that are comingthrough, that is a way in which we can prioritise ourown activities to respond to that; but there is a lotmore work to be done. It is that whole thing ofpriorities. Which is more important: risking theenvironment; working out the tensions within theclimate change polices; or the economic prosperity?

Q74 Mr Stuart: The Government has said it wasgoing to meet the target by 2010, which will now bemissed. I am just trying to find out from you whetheror not you think the 2020 targets from where you aresitting are going to be met, or not?Ms Seaward: My view is they are very challengingso, probably, no.

Q75 Mr Stuart: Thank you for touching on the threeindicators that will be part of the ComprehensiveArea Assessment. Can you tell me your views onthose?Ms Seaward: Very much welcome the indicator onadaptation. That is an area of work that HampshireCounty Council has been engaged in for some time.I think we need to be very clear about how we reportprogress on that. I would welcome further clarity;and I think there is some work to be done with thegovernment departments to actually work outexactly how we are gong to do that. At the momentit is a case of us judging ourselves on our ownperformance, and I think we need some independentindicators as to how our performance is movingforward.

Q76 Mr Stuart: Hilary, do you think having a focuson these three may take away from integratingclimate change across a broader range of indicatorsand targets?Ms Knox: I would think it is an either/or. I think theway local government is seeing this problem is bylooking to have climate change mainstreamed byembedding it into the culture of local councils atevery single level and, at the same time, making surethat it adopts the indicators that have been includedwithin the new performance framework.

Q77 Mr Stuart: Is there not a danger in the highpressurised position local government finds itself in,of having to deliver these targets in order to keepfunding, that it will be stuck in the box with theyoung oYcer with “environment” written on his orher forehead?Ms Knox: Obviously my politicians are not heretoday but I am speaking on their behalf. They havegiven a commitment to place climate change at theheart of its vision for change. This document with45 recommendations will make a diVerence on theground, locally, but also nationally and globallywhen they are adopted by all 25 councils, soonhowever to move to just 12 strategic authorities as aresult of local government reorganisation inNorthumberland and Durham with elections inMay this year. With just 12 top tier strategicauthorities, there is a real opportunity for the12 councils to come together in a very consistent wayto address this.

Q78 Mr Stuart: Can I ask you then about LocalStrategic Partnerships and Local Area Agreements.In your three areas, will your Local AreaAgreements include targets on climate change?Ms Knox: Yes.

Q79 Mr Stuart: What drove the thinking behind theselection of those targets?Mr Fiddik: If climate change is mentioned in yourcommunity strategy as something that you are goingto tackle and it is a top priority I do not think thereis any excuse for not having those three indicatorsthere. I certainly support the introduction of theseindicators. Certainly they are very welcome.Particularly the indicator for the council’s ownoperations, yes, I will be the person who isresponsible for producing that; but it will not besomehow stuck down in the organisation because Iwill need to argue for that release of the data; and ifpeople are not collecting it we will have to know,“Why aren’t you collecting it?” It certainly is anincentive to make sure that data within the council isin place. We have some technical issues with theindicators and of course it is still waiting for aresponse from the consultation. The communityindicator, which is obviously for the wholecommunity in an area, is something that weourselves will not be responsible for collectingbecause it will be collected centrally by Defra. It isworth pointing out that I think there is a missedopportunity there in terms of what the data can tellus; at the moment it is a rather aggregate piece ofcarbon dioxide information which essentially justsays for the whole area this is what domestic use is,this is what non-domestic sector use is, this is whattransport sector use. If we with our local strategicpartnerships can identify which areas are needed foraction, we need more disaggregated data, and thefact that this data is essentially coming from twolarge databases which hold the estimated electricityand gas consumption for ever single meter withinour areas, we could argue for more release of that



data. I believe that the only obstacle to that are theutilities who argue that there is some sort ofcommercial confidentiality; I would have thought ifthe nominated supplier on those databases isstripped from that data, I would have thought thatthere is no obstacle for us to use that and it iscertainly absolutely essential for local energyplanning to have better access to that information.Chairman: I do not want to interrupt the flow ofquestioning, but I have to leave. I am going to askMr Chaytor to take the chair.

In the temporary absence of the Chairman,Mr Chaytor was called to the Chair for the

remainder of the meeting.

Q80 Mr Stuart: Should the inclusion of climatechange targets be mandatory, do you think?Mr Fiddik: Personally I would say yes.

Q81 Mr Stuart: What do you think, Hilary?Ms Knox: I think the commitment that has beengiven in the North East speaks volumes.

Q82 Mr Stuart: It is not just the North East though;there are other areas and there is a widespreadproblem that there are some senior oYcers and somesenior councillors in some authorities who are waybehind others and they have inconsistency. If it is anational problem, which it is, or an internationalproblem, then could there not be a case for makingit mandatory?Ms Knox: There is an opportunity for local areaagreements, multi-area agreements and strategicpartnerships to deliver the Government’s ambitionand visions on this without over-prescription, andthis is partly what the sub-national reviewrecognises, that it is about action at a range ofdiVerent spatial levels and over-prescriptionthrough national targets may not necessarilyproduce the best results or the right results becauseall regions of the country are diVerent, despite thisbeing a global and a national challenge.

Q83 Mr Stuart: If it is not made mandatory whatshould happen in order to basically pick up thelaggards, because what we would need to do if we aregoing to deliver a national strategy is at leasthighlight those areas where action is not being takenand bring measures forward to help encourage thetake-up of activity there?Ms Knox: We have not talked about sharing bestpractice this morning and that really is an importanttool, which is perhaps more of a carrot than a stick,but it is about identifying where there are some reallycompelling examples of good practice which can bewidely disseminated, and the Government has a roleto play in helping to do that nationally. Certainly, weare doing that locally through a number of awardschemes and through media campaigns and it isabout often encouraging and bringing people along

as well as, where necessary, having a much moreregulatory approach, but that is not representativeof the approach that we are adopting in our region.

Q84 Mr Stuart: Is that a view that you share, that infact there is suYcient momentum growing that,hopefully, more sticks may not be necessary andencouragement and best practice sharing from theAudit Commission or anyone else could be enough?Ms Seaward: What I would like to see first is someimprovement in understanding on how people arereporting progress. One of the big issues on thecommunity target for reduction of CO2 for exampleis, within a growth area, how do we take account oftrying to map an overall reduction alongsideeconomic growth? There are some tensions in thereand there are certainly some in the adaptationindicator where we have some work to do to actuallymake it comfortable and doable for everybodybefore we could move to making it compulsory. Isupport what Hilary was saying about sharing bestpractice and actually using those champions that wehave already got in the system to actually lead andinspire other people to do it rather than make itmandatory.Mr Fiddik: I would still be quite happy for thereporting on those targets to be mandatory, simplybecause there are diVerences amongst localauthorities and regions but they all have operationsand they all produce carbon dioxide emissions, sothere must be some way forward to report on those,and I think it is quite natural that they should beasked to report on those emissions. As for thecommunity, the borough indicator, I think that is avalid point but that is down to how we are using thatindicator; what commentary is allowed to explainwhether emissions have gone up or down? As itstands at the moment, neither indicator for instanceaccounts for weather, which is rather a simpleadjustment to make, but at the moment as it standsyou will end up with the CO2 indicator going up anddown according to weather conditions. There is theissue of growth; again, as a London borough wehave an incredible amount of growth, an incredibleincrease in floor space through regeneration. Again,if you are able to explain that that can be adjusted byper capita emissions, you would expect from a newdevelopment the per capita emissions shouldactually go down because you have more eYcientbuildings. So there are ways, at least, to account forwhy emissions have gone up or down, which is whywe return to the importance of having accurate,reliable data and making sure you are able to explainexactly why certain sectors are going up or down. Atthe end of the day, however, we should be reportingon these.Mr Chaytor: I am going to have to bring this firstpart of the meeting to a close now, otherwise we willnot have time for our second set of witnesses. Thereare one or two more questions that we would havewished to ask you to do with adaptation, but maybeI could ask the clerk to write to you on that. Thankyou very much indeed for your evidence, it has beenextremely helpful.


Memorandum submitted by Energy Saving Trust

The Energy Saving Trust is pleased to respond to the Environmental Audit Committee’s Inquiry intoclimate change and local, regional and devolved government. Our response focuses on the relevant areas ofthe Energy Saving Trust’s expertise and we do not attempt to answer questions outside our area of expertise.

We believe that all levels of government have an important role to play in helping to reduce carbonemissions. In particular, those levels closest to the community—namely, local government,—are in a primeposition to take a leadership role and engage with citizens to reduce individual emissions. We are also of theview that local government’s capacity, both financial and skills, needs to be significantly improved in orderto successfully lead their communities on climate change action.

1. Introduction

1.1 The Energy Saving Trust was established as part of the Government’s action plan in response to the1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, which addressed worldwide concerns on sustainable developmentissues. We are the UK’s leading organisation working through partnerships towards the sustainable andeYcient use of energy by households, communities and the road transport sector and one of the key deliveryagents of the Government’s climate change objectives. Our response focuses on the key areas of the EnergySaving Trust’s activities and related issues that are relevant to the inquiry. We do not attempt to answerquestions outside our area of expertise. Please note that this response should not be taken as representingthe views of individual Energy Saving Trust members.

2. Performance Framework

2.1 The Energy Saving Trust strongly supports the inclusion of climate change mitigation indicators inthe new performance framework for local authorities—the Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA).

2.2 Until now, climate change has not featured in the Comprehensive Performance Assessment and as aresult, LA performance in the area has been patchy. In the absence of any performance indicators, initiativessuch as the Nottingham Declaration and activities of the Energy Saving Trust have sought to stimulateinterest and encourage LAs to take action. However, climate change indicators within the CAA and LAAswill help ensure that climate change is on the LA agenda and will encourage improved performance acrossthe board.

2.3 We are strongly supportive of the community climate change indicator as it seeks to embed localgovernment’s role as an influencer and community leader, and provides a useful link to central governmentclimate change initiatives. However, as this is a particularly new area of LA activity, additional support andresources will be necessary for LAs directly and for those organisations providing services to support LAsin meeting their targets. This is particularly the case for those LAs which have yet to engage with climatechange.

2.4 In addition, the role of the Audit Commission in climate change will significantly increase. As a result,it is vital that Commission staV, particularly those involved in LA risk assessment, have the appropriateskills and knowledge to analyse LA performance.

2.5 The Energy Saving Trust strongly supports the proposed central reporting approach as it will focuseVorts on climate change action rather than measurement and reporting, and will ensure a nationalconsistency and comparability of data. However, the accuracy and timeliness of current data could beimproved to assist LAs in responding to variations as necessary. LAs will also need additional tools to targettheir activity and to monitor its eVectiveness at a greater level of detail. This is where tools, such as theHomes Energy EYciency Database (HEED),2 could helpfully be employed to support targeted LA action.

3. Leadership

3.1 The Energy Saving Trust undertook its LA segmentation research of 368 local authorities in 2006,which highlighted the importance of councillor involvement in tackling climate change.

3.2 When asked if there was an elected member who holds a portfolio for sustainable energy and climatechange, or who is allocated with specific responsibilities, 83% of the highest performing group of localauthorities answered yes. This compared to 37% in the low performance/low motivation group.

3.3 When asked what diYculties the council faced now and in the future with regard to climate changeplanning an average of 43% stated the answer as no nominated champion, but this fell to 22% amongst thehigh performing group and increased significantly to 78% amongst the lowest performing group.

2 The Homes Energy EYciency Database (HEED) has been developed by the Energy Saving Trust on behalf of Governmentto register the uptake of sustainable energy measures and related survey data throughout the UK housing stock. The databaseregisters these installations on a property-by-property basis with data from a wide variety of sources including energysuppliers, government scheme managing agents, local authorities and other landlords, EEAC home energy checks as well asEnergy Saving Trust programmes.


3.4 Along with the Carbon Trust, IDeA and LGA, the Energy Saving Trust launched the NottinghamDeclaration on Climate Change in 2000 (and re-launched in 2005) to secure high level local authoritycommitment to take action on climate change. Signatories now exceed 280. As the Nottingham DeclarationPartnership has submitted evidence separately, the Energy Saving Trust will not be providing a detailedsubmission on the Declaration.

3.5 With the recent Local Government White Paper, much greater recognition has been given to LAs’role as community leaders generally, and specifically in relation to climate change action. LAs are in a goodposition to take the lead, because:

— Local knowledge—a much better and more detailed understanding of its community/people/etcthan central government. It can target areas/homes/people more eVectively.

— Trust—local government is considered more trustworthy than central government and othersectors. It holds a position of authority and is generally well regarded by the people who live inthe area.

— Lead by example—key to any leadership role is leading by example. Many local authorities havebeen working hard to get their own house in order, working with the Carbon Trust’s LA CarbonManagement Programme.

— Partnerships—opportunity to bring key stakeholders in energy in the area together. This includesbusinesses, supply chain, schools, voluntary sector, etc. All these parties are key to action acrossa local area. Local Strategic Partnerships, with clear guidance on how to use them, are integralto this.

— Engagement—All of these combined put local government in a strong position to engage withpeople/community to tackle climate change. In particular, LAs are in a strong position to helpfacilitate the engagement with children through schools, which is an important activity that iscurrently neglected. Children are the decision-makers of the future and it is easier to informbehaviour at an early stage rather than have to attempt to change embedded climate-damagingbehaviour at a later stage. Further evidence can be found in the Energy Saving Trust’s recent reportThe role of education and schools in shaping energy-related consumer behaviour (http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/uploads/documents/aboutest/Schools%20report.pdf).

3.6 LAs have an important role to play in encouraging and persuading behaviour change—by bothleading by example and working in partnership with a range of organisations, including community groups,to bring about more energy eYcient behaviour within its area. LAs are trusted more within their area thancentral government and also have a better knowledge of their communities. This puts them in a strongposition to help catalyse behaviour change and act as an important delivery agent for achieving Governmentcarbon reduction targets.

3.7 Balancing the need to take action on climate change and encourage behaviour change against thedesire to be re-elected is one of the genuine challenges of community leadership. However, now more thanever, there is a groundswell of public support and expectation for action on climate change. There are alsoopportunities to form partnerships with other organisations in order to deliver change. For example, BritishGas is working with 16 local authorities oVering council tax rebates to people who install insulation in theirhomes and are now trialling the programme with some microgeneration technologies. There are alsoopportunities to use incentives/disincentives such as CO2 emissions based parking charges to raise fundingto invest in carbon reductions action elsewhere within the local authority area.

3.8 The work of the Energy Saving Trust and the Beacon Council scheme has provided a range of casestudies on high performing local authorities. The lessons learned so far are:

— Action has to be tailored to local circumstances.

— There is a range of action which LAs can take.

— It is important that policy translates to action.

— Leadership is a must.

4. Energy Saving Trust Work with Local Authorities

4.1 The Energy Saving Trust has a number of programmes targeted at LAs to assist them in increasingtheir carbon savings. For the most part, they have been targeted at councils’ housing stock, fleets andsustainable energy strategies. These currently include:

— An advice and information service for local authorities (Practical help).

— The Energy EYciency Best Practice for Housing programme which provides excellent technicalinformation and training around the improvements that can be made to housing. LA oYcers areregular users of the service.


— The Energy Saving Trust Advice Centres (ESTACs), Energy EYciency Advice Centres (EEACs)and the Energy Saving Trust’s centralised consumer marketing campaigns directly engagehouseholders and many EEACs work with LAs to run targeted advice and communicationcampaigns to local residents. This has helped to develop LA capacity in tailoring outgoingcommunications more eVectively.

— From April 2008, the ESTACs will bring together key partners in the area to deliver householdsustainable energy and transport. It will work closely with local authorities and others to engagecitizens to change their behaviour.

— Key account management for 30 LAs to provide intensive support for the development of astrategy and action plans for their local areas. We have also been marketing to targeted LAs ontheir role as community leaders and what that role might look like.

— Community Action for Energy (CAfE) which provides training, support and networking forcommunity organisations wishing to undertake sustainable energy projects.

5. Capacity, Skills and Training

5.1 In light of the increasing role of regional and local government in climate change mitigation, there isan urgent need to improve their capacity, through increased funding and skilled staV. The new performanceframework will significantly increase the requirements on local government, especially those which have yetto engage with climate change in their area. They will need to acquire the necessary skills and expertiserapidly in order to catch up those LAs which have been active in the area for sometime, and to meet targets.

5.2 Regional government will similarly need to enhance the skills and expertise of its oYcers as theGovernment OYces in the regions have an important role in negotiating LAAs with LAs.

5.3 Whilst the Energy Saving Trust and the members of the Nottingham Declaration Partnership areproviding support to LAs to deliver climate change action, the resources required to cover all LAs is wellbeyond what is currently available. For example, the Energy Saving Trust’s key account management forLAs, at the current level of 30 LAs per year, would take 12 years to cover all LAs.

2 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP)

Executive Summary

The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) welcomes the Environment Audit Committee’s inquiryinto climate change and local, regional and devolved government. This submission focuses on the challengesfor local authorities rather than other tiers of governance. UKCIP was established in 1997 by the UKGovernment to help organisations assess how climate change might aVect them and how they might adaptto climate risks. We co-ordinate and integrate stakeholder-led assessments of climate risks at a regional andnational level, assist the Devolved Administrations in responding to climate and weather risks, and workextensively with English local authorities. UKCIP is an active member of the Nottingham DeclarationPartnership where our responsibilities include preparation of the adaptation content of the website.

Key Issues and Recommendations

— Important that the diVerences between adaptation and mitigation responses to climate change areclearly recognised across all levels of government.

— Adaptation has received significantly less attention than mitigation—although awareness ofadaptation has increased more recently, it still frequently tends to be marginalised in consideringresponses to climate change.

— The simple message to all levels of government is that adaptation will be required to maintain, andenhance, well-being in the face of unavoidable climate change.

— The starting point for local authorities is to understand and adapt to current climate andweather risks.

— Changes to climate and weather impact locally and, therefore, local authorities have a vital rolein adapting their local communities to a changing climate and extreme weather events.


— However, there is still a strong role for UK government and Devolved Administrations inproviding leadership and through policy and regulation

— We welcome the recent increase in resources for adaptation at Defra. However, this must beaccompanied by additional resources at both regional and local levels if the UK is going to adaptsuccessfully to the changing climate.

Introduction to UKCIP

UKCIP was established in 1997 by the UK Government to help UK organisations assess how climatechange might aVect them and how they might adapt to the unavoidable impacts. We co-ordinate andintegrate stakeholder-led assessments of climate change impacts and adaptation at a regional and nationallevel, and provide tools (such as the UKCIP02 climate change scenarios; a risk, uncertainty and decisionmaking framework; and a costings methodology) and guidance throughout the process for bothstakeholders and researchers. Within the UKCIP framework, regional scoping studies on climate changeimpacts have been undertaken for all parts of the UK, and regional climate change partnerships have beenestablished. Sectoral studies focused on a number of areas of activity have also been undertaken. Furtherinformation on the UKCIP tools and studies is available from our website (www.ukcip.org.uk).

Some General Responses

A. A general response to the EAC from UKCIP is to request that, in making its recommendations, dueattention, focus, priority, resource, etc is given to what is still recognised as the Cinderella issue of climatechange viz Climate Impacts and Adaptation. Although general awareness of Adaptation has increasedconsiderably, even in the past 12 months, it is still treated as an afterthought to the mitigation agenda inconsidering policy, governance, regulation, technology, resources, etc. Even in the simple issue ofdocumentation the text on adaptation continues to be treated as an appendage to much more consideredtext on mitigation. Unfortunately this list of EAC questions displays some of these characteristics. So, onequestion addresses both mitigation and adaptation specifically (Q1), one question (Q5) addresses adaptationspecifically and the remaining questions are either specific to mitigation (Q4, Q8) or non-specific. In somecases it is sensible to consider together the implementation of policy on mitigation and adaptation. However,in most cases it is sensible to consider them apart. So our strong recommendation is to ensure that all levelsof government clearly ascribe climate change actions to either: (a) adaptation; (b) mitigation; or (c)adaptation and mitigation.

B. The motives for adaptation at all levels of government are diVerent from the motives for mitigation.So support and encouragement for adaptation needs to be oVered in recognition of the diVerent benefitsthat will accrue. For example adaptation is not a moral issue, nor a CSR issue, nor is it one that needs globalaction to be eVective. Its purpose is simply to maintain, and where possible enhance, the quality of life inthe face of changing climate and weather. For government at national, regional and local level the simplemessage is to achieve resilience to climate change in order to maintain the service provision to thosecommunities for which it has responsibility. This simple message is often lost in the confusion of the widerdebate on mitigation.

C. The climate impacts locally, and its eVects are experienced locally. Therefore, policy with respect toadaptation needs to be developed from the bottom up as well from the top down. Resources applied at thelocal level in undertaking vulnerability assessments and exploring adaptation options will generally providegood value for money. (See further examples below).

D. On the other hand there are some sectors which will be dependent upon top down changes, forexample through regulation. The built environment is a particular instance. Our built environment will onlybe fit for purpose through the remainder of the century if Building Regulations, Eurocodes, BREEAM,Code for Sustainable Homes, etc are developed to include resilience to climate change in their specifications.This issue is complicated by the need to influence the adaptation (retrofit) of existing buildings as well asnewbuild.

E. Resources. UKCIP welcomes the recent increase in resource for adaptation at Defra and the way thatthe LGA Commission on Climate Change has highlighted the importance of Adaptation. This new level ofattention needs to be reflected in additional resource to support government at all levels. For example, localauthorities will need additional support in seeking to honour the commitments made through theNottingham Declaration. UKCIP is keen to explore ways in which this additional resource can be provided,and how support on adaptation can be best delivered. The timing is particularly appropriate as UKCIPreviews its forward programme with Defra.


Responses to Individual Questions


It is important that the diVerences between adaptation and mitigation responses to climate change arerecognised clearly across all levels of government and that adaptation is given greater attention andresources than hitherto.

Local authorities need clear messages and policy drivers for climate change adaptation from centralgovernment. Consideration of adaptation has been lacking until recently and even with greater recognitionrecently, for instance, the CC programme, LA White Paper, etc. still have a much greater emphasis onmitigation than adaptation.


The Nottingham Declaration has been extremely eVective as an awareness raising initiative for Las.

It has been eVective at engaging members and senior management with CC issues as evidenced by sign-up numbers—more than 280 to date.

However, it has not promoted significant action on adaptation to date.

The planned update of the Nottingham Declaration website (scheduled for Apr 08) is intended to provideimproved and clearer guidance for local authorities tackling both mitigation and adaptation.


More explicit reference to climate change adaptation in the new performance framework would be usefulas a driver for local authority actions.

It is much too early to say how eVective the new adaptation PI will prove—but our experience withworking with local authorities and LSPs suggests that it is not likely to be particularly eVective unless takenup as part of the 35 PIs for local target setting within Local Area Agreements (LAAs).

Initially we need to see how many LA/LSPs are adopting that adaptation PI as one of their localpriority targets.


Poorly advanced—typically something of the order of five years behind mitigation. UKCIP is the onlyspecialist agency concerned specifically with climate change adaptation. Regional partnerships and their co-ordinators, supported by UKCIP, provide support, networking and a modest regional resource which weare keen to enhance.

It is not possible to generalise about vulnerability of LAs to climate change as vulnerability varies withlocation, demography, timescale and other socio-economic factors. But all, or most, are likely to bevulnerable to some aspects of CC. UKCIP has developed a new tool (Local Climate Impacts Profile) whichwill help Las understand their own vulnerability.


Now main barriers tend to be conflicting priorities leading to:

— Lack of resources being applied to adaptation.

— Lack of experience of adapting to climate change (in UK and globally) and lack of skilled staV.


Need for stronger central govt drivers for LA activities on CC, particularly adaptation, including:

— Allocation of resources.

— Building of capacity through improved provision of research and training capacity. This issomething that UKCIP could provide with greater resources.

There has been insuYcient attention paid to adaptation to be able to point to policies that are workingwell, although emergency responses to extreme weather events are receiving more attention and areprobably rather more advanced than systematic adaptation to longer term climate changes.


In common with most policy, the PPS is much stronger on mitigation than adaptation. It must also beremembered that PPS only eVect new developments, and major changes requiring planning permission, andso does not cover the vast majority of the built environment. Given the current rate of replacement, this islikely to continue through this century—hence need to consider retrofit adaptation of most existingbuildings.


Most good practice in adaptation is in the realm of Building Adaptive Capacity rather than in DeliveringAdaptation Actions. This will continue to be an appropriate emphasis for the forseeable future UKCIPalready maintains an adaptations database on behalf of Defra, and provides case study material for NDAP,so is well placed to facilitate the sharing of good practice as more examples begin to emerge.

9 January 2008

Witnesses: Mr Lewis Morrison, Head of Community Advice, Energy Saving Trust, Mr Steve Waller, Sustai-nability Advisor, Improvement & Development Agency for Local Government, and Dr Chris West,Director, UK Climate Impacts Programme, gave evidence.

Q85 Mr Chaytor: Good morning, sorry about theslight delay, welcome to the Committee. I wonder ifI could start oV by just asking each of you to say, inless than one minute, who you are and a brief wordabout your organisation and the general position interms of the responsibilities of local government andregional government in climate change policy.Mr Waller: If I could start with myself, we are bothhere really with two hats on. My first hat is as sustai-nability adviser for IDeA, the Improvement & Deve-lopment Agency for Local Government which, ifyou know us, is a sister organisation to LGA who Ithink you met last week, and we are the nationalimprovement agency for local government improve-ment. In addition to that I chair the NottinghamDeclaration Partners Group, I am also the author ofthe Nottingham Declaration as well, and I have beenlistening with real interest to the previous conversa-tions about that.Dr West: I am Chris West, I am the Director of theUK Climate Impacts Programme, based at Oxfordand funded by Defra, with two goals: number one tohelp decision-makers in this country to understandthe impacts of climate change and number two tohelp them adapt to those impacts. We have beenworking with EST and the IDA on local authorityadaptation to climate change and we are alsopartners in the Nottingham DeclarationPartnership.Mr Morrison: Thank you, Chairman. My name isLewis Morrison, I am the Head of CommunityAdvice for the Energy Saving Trust. I do have a

background of six years in local authority withinLondon boroughs and prior to that I was in forestryand woodland management at Rural England andWales. The Energy Saving Trust is primarilytackling climate change within homes and transport,although my area in community advice deals withdelivering programmes to primarily a local autho-rity audience, a regional government audience and acommunity audience. I too am wearing two hats, theEnergy Saving Trust but also the NottinghamDeclaration Partnership. If I can say a quick wordabout the partnership itself, as I am sure you areaware there are other representatives and stakehol-ders such as the Carbon Trust and the Environ-ment Agency.

Q86 Mr Chaytor: Thank you very indeed. Maybe wecould start oV on the question of Declaration and seeif you could just tell us a little bit more about thesignificance of the declaration as you see it and theprogress that has been made in implementing theaims of the declaration by diVerent local authorities.I would like to ask also about the monitoring of thatprogress.Mr Waller: If I cast my mind back to October 2000when I first wrote the declaration, at that time it wassensed in local government and particularly in Not-tingham City Council where I was working at thetime that the time was now right to give local autho-rities an opportunity to put a marker down in termsof building commitment towards addressing climate


22 January 2008 Mr Lewis Morrison, Mr Steve Waller and Dr Chris West

change. It was an up and coming issue for localauthorities, but little did I think or dream that bytoday—or by the end of December last year—wewould have 285 English councils having signed italong with all councils in Wales and Scotland havingsigned their own version and it having permeatedinto the private sector as well. Its value is in the num-bers that have signed it. It is a single side statementof a local authority’s commitment at the most seniorlevel to address climate change, to work withpartners and to address key elements of localgovernment responsibility to both reduce carbonemissions themselves, to reduce carbon emissionswithin the community and then also to integrateadaptation measures, both internally and externallyas well. At its minimum it is just that, it has clearlybeen attractive to local authorities as a way ofmaking a public statement, and I visit many councilswho have a framed copy of it, signed, hung up intheir reception as just that, as a public statement oftheir commitment to addressing climate change.

Q87 Mr Chaytor: Councils like hanging framedcopies of things in their receptions, but what I amreally interested in is the progress being made andwho is responsible for monitoring that progress.Mr Waller: We have only monitored really the num-ber of signatories. We have taken as a campaignamongst the partnership to encourage as manycouncils as we could to make that first step in com-mitment. We realise though that in having got thecouncils to sign that their next question to us waswhat do we need to do, what actions do we need totake in order to address it, and that is why with thehelp of the All Parliamentary Group in 2006 welaunched our on-line web advice to councils whichwe called the Nottingham Declaration GroupAction Pack, which is a web tool hosted by EST, oneof our partners, and it is the only place that localauthorities can go to to get comprehensive advice onhow to mitigate and how to adapt. We do realise asa partnership that that is not enough, which is whywe are considering launching some form of accredi-tation scheme which will be voluntary becausesigning the declaration is a voluntary scheme, so wewill only have a voluntary accreditation scheme, butone that allows councils to progress maybe throughbronze, silver and gold, but by the time they get tothe higher reaches of that, that will involve somekind of external assessment of their performance.The first stages, we envisage, will be self assessmentbut the latter stages of that accreditation scheme,which we are just working up, we expect to be someform of external assessment. I think at that point,which is some time down the line, we will know notjust who has signed it but who is doing what havingsigned it.

Q88 Mr Chaytor: As things stand now is the ESTwebsite the best place to go to see what constitutesbest practice in this field?Mr Waller: It is one of them, yes, and obviously youwill have heard talk of the Carbon Trust as well, andI would add in also the work that we do, that IDeAmy own organisation does, to support the beacon

themes where they are relevant to climate change.You may well know that round nine includes atheme called “Tackling Climate Change” and wehave just finished the assessment of the 26 councilsthat it applied to for that beacon status. When thatis launched on 4 March we will have at least a yearof using those best practitioners to promote goodpractice to English local authorities.

Q89 Mr Chaytor: Finally, can I ask what would holda council back from signing the Nottingham Decla-ration? Why are some not signing?Mr Waller: That is a very good question and thattroubles us as well because there are around 100councils that have not signed it. Whether that is thesame thing as saying there are 100 councils who havemade no action on climate change we are not quitesure, but I suspect it is the idea of making a publicstatement, they perhaps do not quite feel that theiractions give them yet the confidence to make a publicstatement. Most of them, if they think long andhard, whether it is action on waste or managingenergy are making some contribution to either miti-gation or adaptation.Mr Morrison: If I could step in to quantify that alittle bit in terms of the eVect that the NottinghamDeclaration has had on local authorities, the EnergySaving Trust undertook a survey of signatories lastyear. We had 127 responses from, at that point, 237signatories around England, so representing aroundjust over half of signatory local authorities. In termsof dealing with your last question first, in terms ofwhat barriers there may have been, over 80% saidthat there is no negativity regarding signing thedeclaration, they were happy to do it and wanted todo it, but I have some information here and 10%cited such factors as lack of understanding aboutwhat the Council could expect to achieve, addedlittle value as work was already being done andunder way and question marks over the means ofresources to deliver. However, I should say that over80% said that they were happy to sign and then takeit forward. Of those 127 respondees, almost a quar-ter since signing have adopted a climate change stra-tegy and just over another quarter are preparing one,but obviously that leaves perhaps 50% that we arenot entirely sure where they are at, hence Steve’scomments on the accreditation.

Q90 Mr Chaytor: Can I ask another question on theaccreditation scheme, can you say something abouthow that is going to be funded and what is your pro-jected timescale for that to be implemented, whenwill this see the light of day?Mr Waller: We expect to take the lead ourselveswithin the partnership on defining exactly whatwould constitute achieving the individual levels ofthe accreditation scheme. I expect that for the self-assessment part, once we have provided guidance tocouncils on exactly what that means then there willbe no external costs, the cost will really only come atthe latter stages of the accreditation scheme, silverand gold, where we will insist on there being externalverification. It will be providing that means of exter-nal verification, that is where the costs will come. I



am in discussions with the Government at themoment to see whether that is something they mightconsider helping the partners with; if that does notcome through then our other option would be toinvite local authorities to pay for that themselves, asthey currently do with other verification schemessuch as those on equalities or environmental mana-gement where this is quite a well-established process.

Q91 Mr Chaytor: And timescale?Mr Waller: We would expect to hopefully launchthis when we re-launch the website in April this year,2008, so it is fairly imminent.

Q92 Mr Stuart: It sounds like yet another organisa-tion setting up yet another accreditation scheme visi-ting councils. Surely you should be putting this tothe Audit Commission—I should declare an interestbecause my wife works for them—rather than crea-ting yet another duplication.Mr Waller: There are very important distinctionsbetween the role of the Audit Commission and whatwe are oVering here, and we have discussed it withthem. Their response was that an accreditationscheme, if it was well thought-through and well exer-cised, would provide them with the assurance that acouncil was actually tackling climate change, so itmight actually assist the Audit Commission, but wedo not want to set up, neither is it necessary to setourselves up, as a statutory auditing body. The Not-tingham Declaration is a voluntary scheme and any-thing we develop alongside it should also be volun-tary as well, we feel, and it may well appeal to adiVerent audience as well. We may well find oursel-ves able to visit councils in a way in which the AuditCommission cannot.

Q93 Jo Swinson: Sticking with the Audit Commis-sion and the new indicators on climate change thatnot necessarily all councils will choose to go with—but clearly the members of the Nottingham Declara-tion might be expected to be more likely to—do youthink they are going to have suYcient data for base-lines for those indicators, or is that going to be a pro-blem?Mr Morrison: If I may begin with that one to providea bit of context to the answer the Energy SavingTrust delivers programmes to local authorities, oneof which is currently called a key account pro-gramme, and we are currently working with 30 localauthorities and we are hoping to extend that to 68,including the devolved nations, next year. What thatprovides us with is soft intelligence and insight as tothe dilemma facing local authorities in dealing withthe indicators. Yes, they recognise it as a key step, astep change, but in terms of data there are concernsabout it. Sorry, could you just repeat the final partof the question so I can make sure I am on track?

Q94 Jo Swinson: Really just about how will theycreate baselines that then go forwards and measureprogression.

Mr Morrison: The sources of data include, obviou-sly, the data from Defra on emissions, burn emis-sions. They hold themselves local authority emis-sions, resources such as stock condition. The EnergySaving Trust has a Home Energy EYciency Data-base which we may well talk about later, I am sure,which has information on energy eYciency measu-res. In a sense there is perhaps a fear of lack of com-parability with all of these sources, so one of themotives I suppose for the Nottingham DeclarationPartnership is to help address that issue and commu-nicate this issue up to government departments.

Q95 Jo Swinson: You mentioned the Burr stuV;there is a lot of national data but how can that pro-perly be disaggregated to be meaningful for eachindividual local authorities, or can it be?Mr Waller: It already is. You heard from previousspeakers that the indicator on spatial emissions isalready available to local authorities. Burr alreadymake that information available in terms of energyuse and Defra pay AEA Technology to convert thatinto a definition of carbon, so local authoritiesalready have access to that for that particular indica-tor, and Defra’s intention as we understand it is thatthat will continue to be made available so that localauthorities will be given statements about theamount of carbon used or generated through use intheir local authority areas, but their responsibilitywill be to put forward actions which will seek toreduce them. I also understand again that Defra areconsidering providing further guidance to councilson what kind of carbon emissions or carbon reduc-tions could be expected from individual measures,individual interventions, and that is a missing pieceof the jigsaw. As Lewis already mentioned, the ESThave their HEED database, which local authoritiesfind very useful, but there is this missing gap oninterventions for a spatial area and my expectationis that Defra will plug that. Chris wants to talk aboutadaptation as well.Dr West: On the mitigation side, where you have gota physical quantity that you can imagine measuring,on the adaptation side we do not have the same thingand we will not be able to have an outcome measurefor decades. We do not have a baseline, we do notknow how well adapted any organisation is to thecurrent climate, so we are thrown back on some sortof process measure, an indicator based on process,and that raises the problem that we actually do noteven know what is good practice. We have got prac-tice and we can describe that and there are a numberof, if you like, sequelae that we can look for in acouncil that is managing climate risk well, but theyare only personal interpretations, we do not have theevidence base to start measuring adaptation.

Q96 Mr Caton: Continuing on the theme of the col-lection and use of data—this is primarily for MrMorrison of EST—the Local Government Associa-tion Climate Change Committee’s report said allcouncils should contribute to the Home EnergyEYciency Database and should have access toenergy performance certificates in their area so they



can build up a better picture of energy eYciency oflocal housing stock. Why is that not happeningalready?Mr Morrison: The Energy Saving Trust holds theHome Energy EYciency Database and there is nomandate upon local authorities that they shouldsubmit data; I suppose it is a goodwill gesture orwhere they find the facility and the infrastructureuseful to inform their own campaigns. I suppose itgoes back a little bit to the previous session in a senseabout a wilful individual, a wilful HECA oYcer forexample in a local authority recognises the logisticalneed for him or her to deliver a campaign and targeta campaign eVectively, and he or she will use thatresource and in fact find that those more proactivelocal authorities will perhaps have on their databaseup to 60% of their housing stock in their local autho-rity area, but local authorities who perhaps are lessable or less keen to use the facility maybe have only 3or 5% population of the database representing theirhousing stock. I suppose there is no prerequisite thatthey must use it, but we make them aware that theycan use it and certainly with our one-to-one relation-ships, with our programmes that we deliver to localauthorities, it is there as a resource for them if theychoose to use it.

Q97 Mr Caton: Do you know how many are using it?Mr Morrison: There are 125 local authority users of460 plus local authorities, English local authorities.

Q98 Mr Caton: Would actually providing this be oneof the boxes that needed to be ticked in a certificationscheme for the Nottingham Declaration?Mr Morrison: I will probably hand this to Steve but,absolutely, it is something that the Energy SavingTrust have put on the table as a resource that wewould be happy to use cross-partner.Mr Waller: Our thinking at the moment is a bit broa-der than that. I am sure Lewis is right on the detailsof what we might expect councils to show that theyare doing, but in simple terms as we envisage at themoment the next stage of our accreditation scheme,having signed the declaration, to achieve bronze willbe to develop actions or an action plan to addressmitigation and adaptation. The next stage, the silverstage, will be to have delivered on the ground actionsas a result of that and then we are still looking atquite what we would mean by a gold standard. Itwould clearly be more than that plus it would factorin at least at that point local authorities earnestlyengaging in reporting on the indicators, havingincluded those indicators or some of those indicatorswithin their LAAs, so some kind of definition of atleast above good practice, some kind of excellentpractice, but at the moment we are looking at this infairly broad terms.

Q99 Mr Chaytor: Chris, you are nodding vigorously.Dr West: I am agreeing; I do not have anything toadd to that. The Nottingham Declaration, a bottom-up initiative, has got to be seen to have thesebenchmarks.

Q100 Mr Stuart: The Environment Agency, in itssubmission to us, suggests that following the Nottin-gham Declaration the response has not been consis-tent, nor has it been coordinated with considerablevariation in the quality of outcomes. That was in thecontext of the Nottingham Declaration, it is not anattack upon the Nottingham Declaration, it wasabout the response of regional and local authoritybodies. Do you accept that?Mr Waller: We certainly accept that the response oflocal authorities, even those who have signed it, hasbeen very varied, and you heard from the two hereearlier on who are amongst some of the frontrunnersin performing on that. The Beacon Councils, whenwe announce them, will all have signed the Nottin-gham Declaration—most of them signed it severalyears ago—and they will be exemplars in perfor-mance as well, but there is enormous variation. If Iam honest, simply signing it is no guarantee of actionand that is clearly something that troubles us as well.

Q101 Mr Stuart: I was not quite sure what you weresuggesting in the evidence you gave a few minutesago, because the key thing a local authority signs upto is that it will produce a strategy for climate changewithin two years. Local authorities, whatever elsethey can or cannot do, producing paperwork is nor-mally their forte and there is a risk that some of themwho signed the declaration have not even managedto write something with the words climate changeand strategy at the top of a piece of paper.Mr Waller: Nothing substantial, yes.

Q102 Mr Stuart: They are not even doing the bareminimum of producing a document, and that is whatthey often specialise in.Mr Waller: Yes.

Q103 Mr Stuart: That is a fairly desperate situation,is it not, so can I note that and then ask you the ques-tion I asked the earlier witnesses which is are we in aposition to meet the Climate Change Bill aspira-tions, the first set of targets, as far as local govern-ment is concerned. Are the incentives there in place?Mr Waller: Again if we are honest about the declara-tion, one of the reasons it has flourished is because ithas been a policy vacuum, local authorities have notbeen compelled, encouraged or even required toaddress climate change by government and thatposition has persisted until very recently until theannouncement of indicators and until the racking upof a land use planning system, new PPSs and variousother measures. What none of us can really tell iswhat the impact of this new policy climate will be.You met with John Cheshire, the chair of the LGA’sClimate Change Committee last week, and they werein this very same dilemma, trying to judge whetherthis new framework would actually deliver actions,let alone whether it would deliver actions at the kindof level envisaged nationally in the Climate ChangeBill. I do not know any of us will know but they werewilling and I think we are willing to take a deepbreath on that and allow the Government’s newpolicy climate to take eVect over the next couple ofyears, to continue to revisit the situation during that



period and then at the end of a couple of years decidewhether there are more draconian measures neededto require or incentivise local authorities to addressclimate change. The short answer is that none of uscan be entirely certain.

Q104 Mr Stuart: You wrote the Nottingham Decla-ration, you are with IDeA, close to Governmentthinking on local government; why has a govern-ment which protests that it is a global leader in cli-mate change so singularly failed in ten years to putany kind of framework in place that leads to realchange at local government level?Mr Waller: My interpretation of that, certainly onmitigation, would be that the Government in itsearlier climate change strategies or performancereviews saw what the impact of the public sector,including local government, was and what ouractual carbon usage is, which is fairly modest bycomparison with industry and decided to target itsresources and energy at the main energy users. Thiswas certainly the signal internationally and theGovernment responded to that. It is only since 2006,since the publication in April 2006 of the most recentclimate change performance review, that the poten-tial impact of local government has beenacknowledge by central government. Some wouldargue that it is our local authorities’ role in galvani-sing other stakeholders in their area which is moresignificant than simply reducing their own carbonemissions, so it was the Government prioritisingother more obvious carbon users than local authori-ties first.

Q105 Mr Stuart: Although they had given them aduty of community well-being specifically for theenvironmental welfare of the citizen, so it is ratherodd to do that years ago and then not do anythingto back it up.Mr Waller: Yes.Mr Morrison: I would just add to that in terms of myexperience of working with local authorities. Theywelcome the performance framework as a significantstep, but I think the litmus test really is on the latestround of negotiations on local area agreements andfor the 150 or so negotiating local authorities at pre-sent quite how their local area agreements will mani-fest themselves and whether they will include mitiga-tion and adaptation as targets. We are waiting withbated breath and certainly working through our ownrelationships with local authorities to assist that pro-cess, whether it be on data, whether it be makingthem more savvy to implementation further downthe line, but by the middle of this calendar year Ithink we will have a better idea.

Q106 Mr Stuart: What do you think about the factthat it is not mandatory that they have a local areaagreement?Mr Morrison: There is potential for local authoritiesif they recognise that other priorities take prece-dence over mitigation and adaptation and theychoose those priorities.

Q107 Mr Stuart: I am a critic of too many targetsfrom the centre and one could be accused ofinconsistency, but a particular area where targetswould be justified would be something of national orinternational importance which may not be drivinglocal priorities. Although setting local prioritiesnationally seems absurd, this is just the area whereyou would expect that targets set from the centrewould be precisely proper and reasonable and accep-ted across the political divide as the right thing to do,yet this is the area where they are not being set.Dr West: On the adaptation side there is certainly, Ihave perceived, on the Government’s part a percep-tion that this is something that is going to benefit theadapter and therefore there is no need for coercion.That has led to a gap, because if people are not requi-red to look at it they assume it is not a problem. I seethe same thing in big business, they tend to devolveenvironmental management to a site level, and so theimpact of climate and weather on the company isagain assumed to be dealt with at a local level.Within local authorities I have certainly seen mana-gers dealing with environmental problems ofextreme weather, and because they are managers itdoes not get reported upwards to the board so theseproblems are invisible to the board, and so the boardsees no requirement to adapt to climate changebecause they do not see the impact they are suVeringat the moment. Where we have done experiments touncover that and to show the economic cost ofextreme weather, then the council’s senior oYcersstart to notice it.Mr Morrison: Certainly I would echo that in termsof the relationships that we have with local authori-ties in the North that were the subject of floodingrecently. They are responding positively to adapta-tion plans, whereas I would say that local authoritiesthat have not been subject to climatic catastropheare less galvanised. If I could just get a point acrosshere about the spread of intelligent skills and capa-city, not just within local authorities but with theirpartners and perhaps going up to the regional levelas well and the government oYce level, in a sense wehave all been scrutinising the consultation processon the local government performance frameworkand what it is going to look like, submitting our ownresponses as a partnership and as individual organi-sations, hoping that the indicators will be there andthey are. I could not give you statistics to supportthis actually, this is just a notion that I have pickedup from interfacing with local authorities, but Isense that there are a number of local authorities outthere who are just waiting. There are some more gal-vanised local authorities who are ahead of the gamein dealing with it, and the Beacon Councils would beexamples of that, so I would say that in terms of thelocal government performance framework being toa point finalised and this latest round of local areaagreement negotiations, there is perhaps not quiteenough time for the infrastructure to spread theintelligence and the resources and skills needed toreally make a diVerence on the ground. Again, I donot know what the results of the latest negotiationswill look like, but I would say if there had perhapsbeen a longer time or maybe looking forward to the



consequent round of negotiation on local areaagreements, everyone will be a little bit more intelli-gent as to what adaptation is, what mitigation is intheir own service areas and they will be much moreenabled to act.

Q108 Mr Stuart: But if specific targets are not in thelocal area agreements—this is a question I asked theearlier witnesses—what needs to happen to ensurethat laggards are identified and can be brought onboard?Mr Waller: Defra still expects local authorities toreport against all of the indicators, including the cli-mate change one. Your question is around thoselocal authorities who choose not to or feel unable toinclude it within their LAA. I worry particularlyabout those 100, as I said before, where we do notknow whether they have any commitment to climatechange or not.

Q109 Mr Stuart: I worry particularly about the oneswho have signed, put it up in a frame in their recep-tion area and then cannot even be bothered to writea strategy.Mr Waller: The percentage of those in that latterstate as suggested from the research that LGA andEST have done is not very great, who having signedit have failed to act at all. As I said earlier, I think ifthey looked closely at what they have done theywould find they were actually doing more than theyrealised. What worries me is the 100 or so councilsthat have not signed in and made no public state-ment about climate change; those are the ones thatwe will want to monitor quite closely. What LGAhas oVered to do is to pitch in as well. EST have ledthe encouragement of local authorities to sign thedeclaration and LGA have also oVered to explorethe opportunity of actually visiting and paying parti-cular attention to those 100 or so councils who havenot signed it, in order to get them all to sign it withinthe next 12 months. That was one of the recommen-dations that the Climate Change Commission madeto the LGA and that seemingly is the way they aregoing to respond to it, so perhaps within the next 12months we will have as close to 100% signed up aswe can.

Q110 Dr Turner: How do you see the relationshipbetween what the local authorities are achieving interms of targets and the interface with the regionaland national targets? Do you think there is enoughsupport to help local authorities mesh with nationaland regional strategies?Mr Morrison: I would say the infrastructure is there.If we are looking at government departments,pushing down through government oYce, there is aclear flow of information on climate change. TheEnergy Saving Trust work with government oYcesand RDAs through our regional support pro-gramme and we work to increase the intelligence,skills and capacity within those bodies. The infra-structure is there as I say, also from the governmentoYce going down to the local authorities in negotia-ting local area agreements, in putting together localdevelopment plans and what have you, but again I

go back a little bit to the knowledge within that bothparties have, at a local and a regional level, and Isense that with the English regions we are workingwith, broadly they might feel left out from target-set-ting. There are national targets set that can be calcu-lated at a local level, as Mr Waller has alreadyexplained, but quite where the regional spatial stra-tegies and targets and what have you fit in, the regio-nal strategies tend to be more aspirational ratherthan quantitative and so I perceive a piggy in themiddle scenario developing a little bit there. Again,I do not have statistics to support that, but I knowwe have hard of good practice from the NorthEast—if we can use them as an example—but I per-ceive that from my government oYce contacts, thatthey feel perhaps a little bit left out of that communi-cation.

Q111 Dr Turner: How do you think the eVectivenessof the approach we are taking in the UK compareswith other countries, particularly Scandinaviancountries, but any examples you can choose to use?Mr Waller: There is a perception certainly on miti-gation that in terms of the quality of the buildingsthat we have built in this country and the quality ofour planning and our building control process—when I say the quality I mean the standards to whichit is achieved—we are 20 to 30 years behind the bestpractice in Scandinavia. Clearly in terms of insula-tion levels and in terms of defining what we mean bya zero carbon home we have still got a long way togo in terms of delivering on it. Maybe Chris is toomodest, but one thing that is worth reporting in myexperience, having spoken to representatives fromthe Canadian government and regional Frenchrepresentatives, is that they are very envious of thework that we have begun, led by UKCIP, within theUK on adaptation. One of the things that marks theUK oV diVerently is the progress that we have madetowards adaptation and the support provided tolocal authorities. That might seem a little incestuousso perhaps I should shut up and let Chris say whe-ther my perception is held by UKCIP as well.Dr West: Yes, I believe we are doing something thatthe rest of the world has not caught up with. Othercountries are very good at doing academic studies ofimpacts; all over Europe it is being done, all over theworld people are doing lots of impact research.What we are doing that nobody else is doing is deli-berately tying that research to decision-makers sothat it is led by decision-makers. Three years ago thelast of the regional scoping studies on the impacts ofclimate change were undertaken and all of those stu-dies were steered by steering groups, with the usualsuspects—the Environment Agency, the regionalassembly, the RDA and the government oYces—always involved and others as well. Each of thosestudies has led to a partnership of people picking upthe baton, trying to progress adaptation, and yet Iwould say maybe one or perhaps two of thosepartnerships have got serious sustainable funding tomaintain a single oYcer. For the other ones weconstantly have stories: my secondment comes to anend, I am being posted back to so-and-so; thesepartnerships are not stable, they are not sustainable,



they are kept going by individual enthusiasm andlittle pots of money stolen from elsewhere. Theregions have immense power, as you suggested, toinfluence local authorities. I do not think they areable to do it in the current uncertainty about howmuch the RDAs are going to pick up from the regio-nal assemblies—that has not helped.

Q112 Dr Turner: We will come to that. Even if wecould provide stable and sustainable arrangements,do councils have the necessary skills, capacity andstaV time to do this properly, because it is quite acomplex web of interactions that we are buildinghere. Have councils got what is needed?Mr Morrison: I would say there is a vast spread, avast disparity, between local authorities. Throughour key account programme I have sat with someexecutive boards and management boards where cli-mate change has been very much on the agenda ofthe director of planning, director of transportation,director of waste, they have a sustainable develop-ment director in post and the chief executive and theleader or the environment portfolio holder are allwell-switched on, and I could cite a few examplesaround the country, but also there are local authori-ties that I have met with over this past six months,certainly, where it is definitely down to the wilfulindividual, whether it be an over-taxed HECAoYcer or an over-taxed procurement oYcer who isdealing with energy on the side, so I would say thereis great disparity with local authorities and there isnot really a formally recognised local authorityinfrastructure, I suppose, a human resource infra-structure, to deal with climate change.

Q113 Dr Turner: Can this be helped by additionalsupport from the Carbon Trust and bodies such asyourselves?Mr Waller: Absolutely. There is a perception, as Ithink again you heard earlier, that for certain skillsets, certain functions in local government, energymanagement being one of them, there are insuY-ciently trained energy managers. The Carbon Trusthave said they would work with what would be theConstruction Industry Training Board in order totry and fund additional in-house training courses forthat work. This is mirrored very closely, in my expe-rience, with the position that local authorities findon waste as well and part of that solution has beenfor WRAP, the Waste Resources Action Pro-gramme, a Defra-funded organisation to actuallyconstitute and organise in-house training courses forrecycling oYcers and for waste oYcers and I suspectthat that may well be the kind of solution we wouldbe looking for. You also heard earlier, and again itwould be my experience, that there is a nationalshortage of planning oYcers as well. It is fairly wellunderstood that a land use planning system can deli-ver huge potential for carbon homes, avoiding deve-lopments in the wrong places and adaptation gene-rally. Again, it is going to take increasing investmentin what universities have seen, which is planningcourses disappearing quite quickly, certainly asundergraduate courses. Nottingham University,where I did some work myself because I used to live

in Nottingham, have managed to include green elec-tives within Masters programmes for planners, but ifwe are not careful then we certainly will find a natio-nal shortage. The other thing to bear in mind is thatclimate change is often seen as a cross-cutting issueand, as such, is not just looking at particular profes-sional skill sets but looking at the skills that peopleneed in order to negotiate across diVerent disciplineswithin local authorities and to try and co-ordinatework as well. Local authorities work on sustainabi-lity and on local agenda 21—if your memories arethat good, ladies and gentlemen, you might remem-ber some of the work that local authorities did in thelate nineties on that. It is that kind of work, beingable to work across diVerent departments, beingable to work across diVerent sectors outside thecouncil, and those kind of skills we need for climatechange as well as the energy manager type of skillsas well.

Q114 Mr Chaytor: Could I just come in on thatpoint? Do you see any evidence that universities areadapting the structure of their degree courses tobuild in more training on climate change in planningdegrees, or is it still assumed that they will train plan-ners who will then have to learn about the climatechange issues once they have graduated?Mr Waller: I can only really speak for the universityI have had anything to do with which is in Nottin-gham and certainly they abandoned a long time ago,as did the other university, Trent University, the ideaof a planning degree in favour of bringing electivesfor planners into other degrees such as architecture.I could not comment nationally, I have just not hadenough experience.Mr Morrison: Pertinent to that point, I presentedrecently at the Sustainable Development Commis-sion, their Working in Partnership Forum for theFuture. It was a scholars’ programme and they haveplaced Masters degree students on sustainable deve-lopment in local authorities and other places aroundthe UK, and I have met one or two of their scholarsout on site in fact. It is there, I think there is a gathe-ring base of knowledge, but again I could not com-ment in the wider context. Could I very quicklyreturn to the gentleman’s point here on can we helpin terms of a partnership in enabling local authori-ties with their own structures? Steve made a verygood point; climate change as an issue has centrality,it is cross-sector, cross-theme and historically therehas been a perception or a culture within localauthorities that it is not my bag, I have got enoughto do. Certainly, the shared insight of the partners onthe Nottingham Declaration is that we are helpinglocal authorities through our own organisationalprogrammes, we are working with planners, we areworking with transport managers as well, we areworking with human resources et cetera across theboard, so by bringing that insight together or nextstage of development of the Nottingham Declara-tion resources will be more service specific so that thelanguage is understood by the audience. In the past,certainly, I have been a recipient of the NottinghamDeclaration when I worked in local authority; I wasa wilful individual and found it very useful, but in



translating that to other colleagues within a localauthority it took a lot of convincing and an awful lotof biscuit-buying. In a sense they need to understandwhat is being said and the language needs to be right,but, yes, we can help.

Q115 Mr Chaytor: Before we finish there is one otherarea I really want to cover and this is about adapta-tion, which we touched on briefly earlier. What Iwould like to ask, if you can respond fairly quickly,is in terms of the specific actions needed to move for-ward on adaptation, what are the most importantareas; secondly, which local authorities have got thebest record on adaptation; and, thirdly, do you thinkthat there would be a value in having a statutoryduty on all local authorities to take action on adap-tation? Chris, do you want to come in on this?Dr West: Help me if I do not retain the three ques-tions but, first of all, why they struggle I think thatalthough climate change is acknowledged to be acentral cross-cutting issue it actually has a home inmany organisations, in councils in particular, in theenvironment directorate. One of the problems thatwe have perceived is moving it outside that directo-rate, so we can expect the environment oYcers toknow about it, to understand the issue. When thefinance director takes notice we know that they havetaken a quantum jump in dealing with the issue. Isaid before about how councils at a top board leveldo not appreciate the issue because they do not expe-rience it. One of the things we are experimenting withis actually challenging the council to quantify theirvulnerability in the present with a view to helpingthem think about their vulnerability in the future,maybe by identifying the thresholds beyond whichthey have a problem so that they can then ask sensi-ble questions about risk.

Q116 Mr Chaytor: Could I just interrupt you there?I take your point about the need to spread the mes-sage across the organisation and particularly get thesenior management to take it on board and not gettrapped within the environmental field, but I aminterested to see what you think, once the financedirector and the chief executive take it seriously whatare the main actions and adaptations that the localauthority needs to take, or have we got good exam-ples of local authorities already doing this?Mr Waller: We have got some examples of localauthorities being active.

Q117 Mr Chaytor: Who are the best ones?Mr Waller: I am not going to answer that. I couldnot say.

Q118 Mr Chaytor: Would anybody on the panelanswer that?

Mr Morrison: Again, I speak outside of my remitbecause I do not deal with adaptation, but what Iperceive from local authorities is that I have not yetidentified one that is dealing with it perfectly acrossthe board. I do see good examples, for example,Bournemouth have got sustainable drainage systemsto cater for floods and I know that Rotherham andBolton are dealing very well with it. I could not citeexamples across the board; this is just some intelli-gence I am picking up.Mr Waller: In terms of having visited ten councilsrecently as part of the assessment of those that haveapplied for Beacon status, we were pleasantly surpri-sed that most of those ten—which included Worces-tershire, Middlesbrough, several London boroughs,Eastleigh District Council—and these are all publi-cly available so I am not sharing secrets with youhere—most of those had done more on adaptationthan we perhaps had anticipated they would. Thekind of actions that they had reasonably consistentlytaken—which was what we wanted them to andmost had begun to do—was to take an across-the-board risk assessment of the vulnerability of variousservices and the functions that they undertake to cli-mate change and then, hopefully, to respond to it.That would characterise the ideal council respon-ding on adaptation.

Q119 Mr Chaytor: That is very helpful. Finally,back to Chris on the final point, this question of thestatutory duty on councils, would that be useful oris it just another meaningless development?Dr West: I believe it would. Councils struggle withthis concept of delivering well-being of the commu-nity. They all acknowledge they have it as a task buthow they actually deliver it, I think they strugglewith that. You can argue that adapting to currentand future climate must be a major component ofthat well-being of the community.Mr Waller: With my IDeA hat on I would have togo with LGA’s position which is to say let us give thenew policy framework a couple of years to bed inand then review that question.

Q120 Mr Stuart: The Climate Change Bill has gotadaptation in it; is there anything else in particularthat you would like to see because it will be cominghere soon?Dr West: I really think that the statutory duty to testthe vulnerability of public bodies is important. In anidea world everybody would do it anyway, but weneed the statutory duty to actually give people thepush to undertake something which, yes, they pro-bably ought to be doing anyway.

Q121 Mr Chaytor: Chris, Steve, Lewis, thank youvery much indeed, it has been extremely interestingand valuable. If there is anything that you feel youhave not had the opportunity to say in the course ofthis session, because we were under some timepressure, please feel free to send us further evidence.Mr Waller: Thank you, Chairman.


Wednesday 2 April 2008

Members present


Mr Martin Caton Martin HorwoodColin Challen Dr Desmond TurnerMr David Chaytor Joan Walley

Memorandum submitted by Defra

Introduction

1. The UK Government and devolved administrations believe that climate change is one of the greatestlong-term challenges facing the world today. Avoiding dangerous climate change and adapting tounavoidable climate change is a huge undertaking that requires more pronounced and continuing cuts inemissions and more co-ordinated and concerted eVort on adaptation.

2. The UK is on track to meet, and exceed, its commitment under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissionsof greenhouse gases to 12.5% below 1990 levels by 2008–12. The UK Government and devolvedadministrations recognise that they must continue to show leadership domestically and internationally onmitigation and adaptation.

3. The UK Government, working with the devolved administrations has put forward a Climate ChangeBill which would put into statute UK targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, through domestic andinternational action, to 26–32% below 1990 levels by 2020 and by at least 60% by 2050. It will introduce fiveyear carbon budgets and create the Committee on Climate Change to provide advice to the Government.The Bill also contains key provisions on adaptation, including commitments for five yearly assessments ofrisk to the UK and to publish a programme of action to tackle those risks.

4. In meeting our climate change goals the UK Government recognises that action by local authorities,regional bodies and devolved administrations will be crucial in helping to ensure that the UK meets itsobjectives. Establishing the correct frameworks to ensure that all levels of Government are able to reduceemissions and adapt to the climatic changes we are already experiencing in addition to those forecast for thefuture is a key priority for the UK Government.

5. The UK’s climate change strategy is heavily influenced by the scope and coverage of the constitutionalframework. The UK Government retains overall responsibility for the Kyoto Protocol target and forputting in place a programme to deliver it. However, many of the policies implementing the climate changestrategy are devolved matters. The devolution settlements, ie the Scotland Act 1998 and the Government ofWales Act 2006, provide the devolved administrations with a power to legislate in those areas which havebeen devolved. In such areas, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the NorthernIreland Assembly have the legislative competence to introduce their own policies and measures. The threedevolution settlements are diVerent, with each devolved administration having a distinct set ofresponsibilities, and powers to act, to tackle climate change.

6. This memorandum has been jointly developed by the Department for Environment, Food and RuralAVairs (Defra) and Communities and Local Government (CLG) with input from Department for Businessand Regulatory Reform (BERR) and the Department for Transport (DfT). It is understood that thedevolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are considering submitting separateevidence to the inquiry. Views expressed in the rest of this memorandum on the role of local and regionalbodies refer to policy in England and therefore may not necessarily represent those views and policies of theDevolved Administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.


Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can the accountabilityand transparency of the response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?



7. UK Government supports local and regional bodies and the devolved administrations to take actionon climate change through setting the overall framework for action, through setting out the policies andmeasures to meet UK goals and targets (and encouraging action in those areas that are devolved) andthrough providing incentives and encouragement for local action.

8. The 2006 UK Climate Change Programme was developed by the UK Government and devolvedadministrations in partnership and includes specific chapters setting out the action being undertaken in eachdevolved administrations. The 2007 Energy White Paper provides further UK policy proposals in relationto energy. These documents therefore cover measures relating to action in both reserved and devolved policyareas; some measures apply throughout the UK whilst others only within the territory of a devolvedadministration. Current action by the devolved administrations (in devolved policy areas) is set out in thefollowing: Scotland’s Climate Change Programme,1 the One Wales2 agreement, and the NorthernIreland Sustainable Development Strategy (2006).3

Action by Local Authorities in England

9. While the UK Government and the devolved administrations have responsibility for setting the overallstrategy for tackling climate change, establishing the right policy framework and ensuring that other policiesdo not cut across climate change and sustainable development objectives, local authorities have a specialstatus as local, directly elected bodies.

10. Local authorities in England are uniquely placed to provide vision and leadership to localcommunities, raise awareness and help change behaviours. They can reflect the issue in: SustainableCommunity Strategies; the discharge of their responsibilities on waste, local transport, housing, planning,fuel poverty and enforcement of building regulations; and in engaging and mobilising business, industry,communities and individuals to address the issue in the workplace and at home. Through actions on theirown estate and working with communities they can have significant influence over emissions in their localareas.

11. English local authorities are encouraged to sign the Nottingham Declaration on climate change andto work with the UK Government to contribute, at a local level, to the delivery of the UK Climate ChangeProgramme and to the achievement of the UK’s emissions reduction targets. Some local authorities haveadopted targets to help guide the action that they are taking. Others have participated in the Carbon Trust’sLocal Authority Carbon Management Programme, which requires them to set targets and to adopt astrategy for reducing emissions under the control of the local authority such as buildings, vehicle fleets, streetlighting and landfill sites.

12. Some local authorities are already making a significant reduction in carbon emissions but all localauthorities could do more to mitigate against and adapt to the eVects of climate change, with the rightsupport. The policies outlined in the UK Climate Change Programme 20064 and the Local GovernmentWhite Paper5 have or will give local authorities in England new opportunities to put climate change at theheart of their local priorities, and to lead action to make a diVerence to the local area, the country and theplanet. Defra also provides funding to UKCIP, which provides advice and support to private and publicsector organisations in assessing their vulnerability to climate change so that they can plan their ownadaptation strategies.

13. The UK Government has recognised the need to help focus and give clarity to the role that localauthorities can play. For the first time, indicators to measure the progress of local authorities in Englandto tackle climate change mitigation, adaptation and fuel poverty will form part of the Local GovernmentPerformance framework from April 2008. Progress to reduce emissions, adapt to climatic changes andreduce the incidence of fuel poverty will form part of the Comprehensive Area Assessment from 2009. Thissends a clear message to local authorities as to where we expect them to focus their environmental actions—in their own operations and buildings, and as service providers and as leaders of their local communities.Through the performance framework local authority performance on tackling climate change will now betransparent.

14. Inclusion of climate change indicators in the performance framework is expected to stimulate furtheraction at a local level. The UK Government and local government in England are also currently negotiating150 Local Area Agreements where specific performance improvements are agreed for up to 35 national

1 www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/03/30091039/02 http://new.wales.gov.uk/about/strategy/onewales/?lang%en3 http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/economic-policy-sustainable-development4 http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/climatechange/uk/ukccp/index.htm5 http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/strongprosperous


indicators (plus 16 from Department for Children, Schools and Families). Defra is working withGovernment OYces to ensure that both climate change mitigation and adaptation are properly representedin the agreements.

15. The Government is also currently negotiating a number of Multi-Area Agreements for sign-oV inJune 2008. These are cross-boundary agreements between a number of local authorities and their partnersand Government. Their overall objective is to improve economic performance by addressing issues that canbe most eVectively dealt with at the sub-regional level, and may oVer opportunities to address issues suchas climate change adaptation and mitigation.

16. As recognised by the LGA Commission on Climate Change, it will be important to review how localauthorities have responded to the challenge over the next three years. It is currently too early to say if thiswill see a step change in action by local areas—but it is clear that if local communities acting in partnershipprioritise action on climate change, they can begin to have a real impact in mitigating climate change andin adapting to its eVects.

17. A consultation on the technical definitions of the indicators has recently been concluded by CLG andit is expected that the final handbook of definitions will be published in February for implementation fromApril 2008. The new climate change indicators in England, subject to technical amendment following theconsultation, are as follows.

National Indicator 185: CO2 reduction from Local Authority operations

18. The aim of this indicator is to measure the progress of local authorities in reducing emissions fromtheir own operations which are directly under their control and to encourage them to demonstrateleadership on tackling climate change. Measurement against this indicator will require each LA to calculatetheir carbon emissions from analysis of energy/fuel bills and outsourced services using a prescribedmethodology.

19. The following sectors are proposed for inclusion in the indicator:

— council buildings;

— streetlights;

— leisure centres;

— schools;

— council vehicle fleet;

— employee commuting; and

— social housing.

20. The indicator has significant potential to act as a key driver for councils to improve their energyeYciency and the direct linkage between action and performance makes this a transparent indicator. Thiswill be the first time that consistent data on CO2 emissions directly attributable to the activity of LocalAuthorities will be available for performance monitoring.

National Indicator 186: Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions in the Local Authority area

21. The aim of this indicator is to incentivise local authorities to take a lead role within their communitiesto encourage and facilitate reductions in CO2 emissions across an agreed set of sectors over which they havesome influence. Although reductions in community emissions are diYcult to attribute directly to localauthorities, action by local strategic partnerships led by LAs, should take joint accountability for CO2

reduction in the community, and action by all partners will be critical to the success of initiatives to reduceemissions.

22. The indicator will measure emissions in the local area from the following sources:

— Business and public sector organisations, including agriculture (excluding those included underthe EU Emissions Trading Scheme).

— Domestic housing.

— Road transport (excluding motorway traYc).

23. This data is already captured, analysed and published by UK government to produce area by areacarbon emissions per capita. The data for 2005 will be used as the baseline for calculating annual reductionsin emissions.


National Indicator: 187 Tackling fuel poverty—people receiving income based benefits living in homes witha low energy eYciency rating

24. The indicator measures the proportion of households on income related benefits for whom an energyassessment has been carried out, and whose SAP rating meets the standard (eg, SAP rating of below 30).SAP is being used as a proxy for fuel poverty in households of people claiming income based benefit, giventhe link between income poverty and fuel poverty.

25. The data is intended to be captured as an annual random SAP survey of 1% of households, with anextra question to ascertain any benefit receipt of householders. Local authorities are then asked to completea desktop exercise, using an agreed formula, which reports on the proportion of households in receipt ofincome benefits and a low energy eYciency. Good performance is shown by a reduction in the proportionof households with a SAP below 30.

26. Local authorities have an important role in tackling fuel poverty and this indicator enables progressto be measured in households most at risk of being in fuel poverty.

National Indicator 188: Adapting to climate change

27. The indicator measures progress on assessing and managing climate risks and opportunities, andincorporating appropriate action into local authority strategic planning. The risks and opportunities mightinclude: flooding; heat waves; changing patterns of disease, impact on local ecosystems; and changingdemand for and scope to grow new crops; reduction in heating bills and increased tourism.

28. We anticipate that a local authority in delivering on the 198 new LAA performance indicators andtheir 35 performance targets in the medium and long term will have to identify and manage risk related toa changing climate and extreme weather conditions.

29. This indicator, together with other climate change indicators will inform the Audit Commission’s riskassessment as part of the new CAA process regardless of whether they are included as one of the 35performance targets. This will provide consistent and external challenge in the public arena improvingtransparency and accountability at the local level.

The National Improvement and EYciency Strategy

30. The National Improvement and EYciency Strategy agreed by the UK Government and the LGA hasnow been published. It will be supported by £384 million which was announced as part of CSR07 comprisingRevenue Support Grant top-slice (£114 million) and CLG support (£270 million) for the period 2008–11.The strategy will support councils, as leaders of place, working with their partners, including regionalbodies, to deliver outcomes on local priorities including climate change. It supports a devolved approachby placing local government led regional improvement and eYciency partnerships at the heart of deliverysupport arrangements. RIEPs have a key role in co-ordinating and ensuring that the right support is in placeat the right time to deliver improved outcomes for local communities through the LAA.

31. In addition, the recent Local Government Finance Settlement included a continued real termsincrease in fundingUwhich will allow authorities to continue to deliver eVective services at an aVordable cost,including action to tackle climate change.

The Carbon Reduction Commitment

32. The Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) is a new mandatory emissions trading scheme,announced in the Energy White Paper 2007, designed to deliver carbon emissions savings of 1.1 MtC/yearby 2020. The scheme will cover large, non-energy intensive business and public sector organisations (suchas supermarkets, hotel chains, large local authorities, banks and government departments), a sector whichaccounts for roughly 14 MtC per year, 10% of total UK emissions. We expect that most large top tierauthorities will be included in the scheme when it is introduced in January 2010.

Action by regional bodies in England

33. Regional bodies work with local authorities and other partners to help coordinate local, sub-regionaland regional activity to meet national policy objectives and reduce overlaps to optimise outcomes. Regionalbodies have powers and responsibilities that will impact on the long-term shift to a low carbon economysuch as the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) responsibility for regional economic development(including Regional Economic Strategies) and the Regional Assemblies responsibility for the regionalspatial strategy. Regional bodies also have a clear role to play in adaptation to climate change throughsupporting local government, identifying and taking forward economic opportunities and co-ordinatingactivity where adaptation needs to be considered at the regional level.


34. Regional Development Agencies are strategic economic development bodies, required to address thepriorities identified in the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for their regions, in a way that also contributesto the delivery of a number of Government’s national policy priorities. RDAs provide regional leadership,ensuring that development and delivery of the RES objectives are informed by sustainable developmentpriorities and analysis; deliver carbon reduction in the business sector; champion sustainable design andconstruction methods; support research and development to help grow innovative businesses andsustainable energy markets and attract global investment in environmental products and services to ourregions.

35. As part of their role in delivering the priorities identified in the Energy White Paper, RDAs have beengiven the key role in setting regional energy priorities and take forward initiatives to support national energypolicy, for example by committing to set carbon reduction targets in their corporate plans, and to set outwhich energy technologies they intend to prioritise and support over the next ten years. RegionalDevelopment Agencies, through developing and helping implement the Regional Economic Strategies(RES), have taken steps to help address climate change within the regions. For example the South East ofEngland RES, revised in 2006, has a headline target of reducing the rate of increase in the region’s ecologicalfootprint, and stabilising and reducing it, by 2016. The West Midlands has just launched the first “lowcarbon RES”.

36. RDAs are sponsored by the BERR and receive £2.2 billion funding (FY 2007–08) from sixGovernment Departments (CLG, BERR, Defra, DfES, DCMS and UKTI). This Single Programme(commonly known as the “single pot”) gives RDAs the flexibility to address regional priorities (set out inRegional Economic Strategies) in a way that also contributes to the delivery of the current suite of nationalPSA targets 2005–08. Currently there are overarching targets for: Regional Economic Performance,Sustainable Development and Productivity/Rural Productivity; which contribute to delivery of a range ofsupplementary PSA targets (for example Skills and Sustainable Farming and Food). The flexibility this hasprovided to RDAs has enabled them to take action on climate change in ways which are appropriate totheir regions.

37. From 1 April 2008, RDAs will be tasked to address climate change (mitigation and adaptation)though their contribution to delivery of Government’s Regional Economic Performance PSA target, andadhering to cross-cutting principles of sustainable development, and economic opportunities for all.

38. Regional Assemblies currently have an important role to play in delivering climate change objectives.Regional Assemblies are voluntary bodies which comprise Councillors from a number of local authoritiesin their region, and also representatives from social, economic and environmental organisations. They arenot directly elected bodies, but are multi-party political bodies. Regional Assemblies act as the voice of theirregion, bringing together local authorities and stakeholders in order to articulate their regions’ needs andpriorities. A number of Regional Assemblies have worked in partnership to voluntarily prepare ClimateChange Strategies for their regions and to demonstrate leadership on this agenda. They can help ensure acoordinated approach to action on climate change across their regions. Regional Assemblies also have aformal role in scrutinising Regional Development Agencies. A number of Regional Assemblies have usedthis role to provide constructive challenge and advice to RDAs about how they are addressing sustainabledevelopment and climate change.

39. In addition to these roles Regional Assemblies are the Regional Planning Bodies and have statutoryduties in relation to planning, transport and housing, oVering significant opportunities to help deliver onour climate change priorities. Regional Spatial Strategies provide the planning framework for renewablesand low carbon development as well as monitoring the progress against these targets. Planning policy is alsoimportant for enabling appropriate infrastructure for future energy needs as well as guiding developmentto reduce the need to travel. Regional Housing Strategies and investment are critical in delivering againstfuel poverty targets and carbon emission reductions. Regional Assemblies are also playing a more importantrole in deciding transport priorities for the region.

The Sub-National Review of Economic Development and Regeneration (SNR)

40. Looking forward, the SNR published in July 2007, sets out a route map to deliver a progressiveagenda of structural and strategic change enabling sustainable economic growth and neighbourhoodrenewal. One key reform that will impact on the delivery of climate change outcomes at the regional level willbe the emergence of single integrated Regional Strategies. These new strategies will encompass the RegionalEconomic Strategies, Regional Spatial Strategies, Regional Transport Strategies, and Regional HousingStrategies. RDAs will become the Regional Planning Body with a new executive responsibility fordeveloping single integrated regional strategies, working close with local authorities and stakeholders.Regional Assemblies will not continue in their current form. This reform will provide the opportunity toachieve true integration of economic, social and environmental interests at the regional, sub-regional, andlocal level. The primary aim of the regional strategy is to achieve sustainable development.


The Greater London Authority Act 2007

41. The Greater London Authority Act 2007 has strengthened the requirement for London to act onclimate change. The Act requires the Mayor of London to produce for London a statutory climate changemitigation and energy strategy and a statutory climate change adaptation strategy. In addition, the Actplaces a duty on the Mayor and the London Assembly to have regard to climate change and theconsequences of climate change, and the Mayor has to have regard to climate change and the consequencesof climate change in preparing other statutory Mayoral strategies.

42. The Mayor’s Climate Change Action Plan was published in February 2007 and sets a target forLondon of a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2025.

Transport policies

43. The Department for Transport (DfT) ensures that transport policies balance the increasing demandfor travel against protecting the environment and improving quality of life, including action on climatechange. DfT have asked local authorities to consider the shared priorities of tackling congestion, deliveringaccessibility, safer roads and better air quality when setting their local transport plans. Local authoritieswere also asked to develop a cycling strategy and most have now done so. To support local authorities indelivering more cycling, which can assist with the shared priorities, the Department for Transport set upCycling England in 2005 who provide free expert advice to local authorities.

44. The Department has also encouraged local authorities to consider the use of smarter choices in theirlocal transport plans—soft measures to encourage greater use of public transport and increases in walkingand cycling and reduce car use. The Department’s Sustainable Travel Towns initiative is trialling the use ofsmarter choices on a large scale across Darlington, Peterborough and Worcester to see what eVect they canhave. A key element has been the use of Individualised Travel Marketing where households are contactedand given information on local travel options so that they can make better informed voluntary travelchoices. This has shown startling results with a 10% reduction in car trips and 20% increase in walking, 30%increase in cycling and 16% increase in bus use across a total target population of around 180,000. The UKGovernment hopes to see more local authorities to make use of smarter choices over the coming years.

45. DfT is also emphasising the need for climate change adaptation to be integrated into transport policyat all levels, in terms of identifying both the biggest risks and the most cost-eVective remedies. This buildson work being carried out, for example, by the Highways Agency to identify and address the climate changerisks to strategic roads. In setting aims for Local Transport Plans it is important that local authoritiesconsider possible climate change impacts such as drier summers and wetter winters which could increaseinstances of subsidence, damaging infrastructure and leading to increased maintenance costs. Increasedflood risk should also be considered when planning new transport infrastructure, as should measures, forexample, to increase green space and tree cover, which can help to reduce the heat island eVect and surfacerun-oV.

The Waste Strategy

46. The Waste Strategy for England 20076 set out the vision, objectives and plans for managing waste.The overall impact of this strategy is expected to be an annual net reduction in global greenhouse gasemissions from waste management of at least 9.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year in2020 compared to 2006 (equivalent to annual use of around 3 million cars). The additional greenhouse gasemissions reductions result from an increase in diversion of waste from landfill of around 25 million tonnesof waste per annum. These benefits will be further boosted by significant extra greenhouse gas benefits fromthe waste prevention measures in the strategy.

47. Changing our waste management practices has already made waste management a more complextask. As waste is increasingly treated as a resource, a much wider range of actions by a larger range of playersis required but these actions need to be coordinated. Local government and regional bodies have a vital rolein providing advice and services to business and householders and developing partnership working. Theyneed the right structures, tools and support to do their job. The Government is:

— strengthening the ability of local authorities in two-tier areas to work together and encouragedpartnership working between local authorities through: new powers in the current LocalGovernment and Public Involvement in Health Bill; use of Local Area Agreements; and the newlocal government performance framework—resulting in better, more cost eVective local services;

— establishing a new local performance package for local authorities to support delivery of theGovernment’s waste outcomes;

— encouraging local authorities to take on a wider role (in partnerships) to help local (particularlysmaller) businesses reduce and recycle their waste with cost savings through more integratedmanagement of diVerent waste streams; and

6 http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/index.htm


— encouraging the Regional Development Agencies and other regional bodies to coordinate businesswaste and resource management in partnership with local authorities and third sectororganisations.

48. Over the summer, the Government consulted on proposals to allow local authorities to introduceincentive schemes to promote recycling and reducing household waste. 80.5% of respondents who addressedthis question thought authorities should have the power to introduce financial incentives. Legislation in theClimate Change Bill, which is currently going through Parliament, will remove the ban on waste collectionauthorities charging for the collection of household waste in up to five pilot areas. However it places severalrestrictions on the way in pilot authorities may charge. These include the requirement that any revenueraised by the authority must all be paid back to residents through rebates, meaning that overall there is nonew burden on householders. Furthermore, before introducing a pilot, authorities must ensure thathouseholders in the scheme have access to a good kerbside recycling service; that the needs of potentiallydisadvantaged groups have been taken into account; and that there is a good fly-tipping prevention strategyin place. Government will report back to Parliament on the success of the pilots before deciding whether ornot to roll out these powers more widely.


49. The Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change has had a significant and positive impact inmotivating local authorities to take action to mitigate and adapt to the eVects of climate change. Over 280local authorities (over half the total in England) have now signed the declaration under which they agree toundertake a number of actions to help deliver the UK Climate Change Programme and to develop plans,within two years from signing, with their partners and local communities to address the causes and impactsof climate change.

50. The results of a survey of signatories of the Nottingham Declaration, conducted in September 2007by the Energy Saving Trust, which provides administrative support for the Declaration, indicate that it hasbeen eVective in facilitating local authority action on climate change. Around 80% of respondents said thatsigning the Declaration helped build member and senior oYcer momentum within their local authorities.This is important as commitment from members and oYcers is essential for enabling eVective local authorityaction. Signing the Declaration had helped get departments working together on climate change, accordingto 48% of respondents. Approximately 70% have either adopted a climate change action strategy or haveundertaken preparatory work on one since signing, with 24% citing signing as the reason. It is also importantto point out that around one third of respondents found that the Declaration had raised public expectationsin the role of local authorities in tackling climate change, representing a key incentive for them to takefurther action.

To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland will set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanUK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030, fittogether with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions, and the impact of carbon reduction policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

51. The UK Government recognises that some devolved administrations, regional governments and localauthorities have or would wish to set targets to drive forward action on climate change within the areas theyserve. While the Government does not envisage disaggregating the national target it does recognise that localtargets can help drive action and that their achievement can make an important contribution to the deliveryof our national targets. For example, the UK Government—via the Government OYce network—iscurrently working with local authorities to agree targets within Local Area Agreements. As part of thiswork, Defra is encouraging as many local authorities as possible to set targets for carbon reduction in linewith the new performance indicators.

52. Greenhouse gas emissions data, disaggregated for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Irelandwas first published in 1999 and is now available for 1990, 1995 and annually from 1998.7 The disaggregateddata is usually published six months after the UK inventory is submitted to the EU and UNFCCC.

53. Defra also publishes annual experimental National Statistics on carbon dioxide emissions at LocalAuthority and Government OYce Region level in the UK. For each Local Authority and Region, theseprovide estimates of total CO2 emissions, and emissions per capita of population. The statistics also providea breakdown of emissions into three key sectors—“industrial, commercial and public”, “domestic” and“road transport”—together with further breakdowns into more detailed sub-sectors. This data is intendedto be used by local authorities and regional bodies to inform target setting.

7 http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/globatmos/index.htm


How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climate change?What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are local authorities, regionalgovernment and devolved administrations?

54. Adapting to climate change is an issue which all levels of government need to address. Some are welladvanced in assessing and addressing the risks they face, in conjunction with their partners. But many moreorganisations need to do more to embed these issues in their mainstream business planning, riskmanagement, contingency planning and investment strategies.

55. The Prime Minister announced on 17 November the Government’s intention to further strengthenthe adaptation measures in the Climate Change Bill, by introducing a risk based monitoring system andprovision for statutory guidance. The Government will be tabling an amendment to create new powers torequire public authorities to assess the risks of climate change and set out what action they need to take inresponse. The Government will also be publishing statutory guidance to help public authorities assess andaddress the impacts of climate change. This is in addition to the commitment to undertake a five yearly UKwide risk assessment and programme of action to address these risks in coordinate way. The Government’sadaptation policy framework, to be published in a few months, will set out future priorities for a cross-Government programme on adaptation.

56. The Government commends the LGA for the leadership they have demonstrated in this area throughsetting up a Commission on Climate Change, which reported in December 2007. We look forward toworking with them in responding to some of the issues identified in the report. We continue to work with the10 Regional Climate Change Partnerships (partnerships of the public, private and voluntary sectors acrossEngland) which work with Regional Development Agencies, Government OYces for the Regions and otherregional partners.

57. The UK Climate Impacts Programme provides one of the most well developed and utilised sourcesof information on climate change impacts and adaptation for the UK including tools to address the risks.Other countries have taken an interest in UKCIP’s work as an example of best practice; for example in 2007it hosted visitors from China and Finland.

58. All authorities and administrations have some level of vulnerability to the impacts of a changingclimate. The important step is to look at the specific risks facing a particular area, the specific vulnerabilitiesand options for how to manage the risks.


59. The Bill requires that the Committee on Climate Change is appointed with regard to the desirabilityof securing experience in, or knowledge of, various issues including “diVerences in circumstances betweenEngland, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and the capacity of national authorities [ie devolvedadministrations] to take action in relation to climate change”. These diVerences must also be taken intoaccount by the Committee in advising on, and the Government when setting, each budget.

What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do the diVerent levels of government have suYcientpowers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? What policies areworking well?

60. A recent study carried out by the Centre for Sustainable Energy8 on behalf of Defra, concluded thatlocal authorities and regional bodies do have significant opportunities to take action to reduce carbonemissions and to adapt to unavoidable climate change within their existing powers and responsibilities.

61. Regional Assemblies are able to help tackle climate change through their statutory powers andfunctions as the Regional Planning Body, in preparing Regional Housing Strategies and in scrutinisingRegional Development Agencies. Nine regional Climate Change Partnerships have also formed acrossEngland which work with Regional Development Agencies, Government OYces for the Regions and otherregional partners.

62. Local authorities have extensive powers in the area of planning, housing and transport, which allowthem to take a lead in tackling climate change. Additionally the Local Government Act 2000 introduced apower to promote “well-being”. This discretionary power enables a local authority to do anything itconsiders likely to promote or improve the economic, social or environmental well-being of its area,provided that such action is not expressly forbidden elsewhere in legislation.

63. In addition, the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 introduced powersto enhance the ability of each local authority to lead their authority and local partners through:

— empowering communities, involving local people and businesses in service delivery;

— streamlining the current national Performance Framework and integrating it into Local AreaAgreements;

8 http://www.cse.org.uk/cgi-bin/projects.cgi?policy&&1077


— new governance arrangements (directly elected mayors or executives);

— local authorities acting as place-shapers and leading the Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP);

— changes to LAAs, replacing the four blocks with themes (including one concerned with economicdevelopment and the environment) and a single funding pot;

— recognising that delivery of services to local communities is a partnership between localgovernment and a range of other public sector providers (Duty to Co-operate on namedpartners); and

— extending the power of wellbeing to town and parish councils, based on the Quality parish scheme.

64. The CSE study also found that examples of best practice to tackle climate change at the local andregional level are principally down to the extensive eVorts of “wilful individuals” who, through theircommitment, knowledge and doggedness, have been able to secure local change. The study recommendedthe use of performance frameworks to mobilise all local authorities to improve their levels of performance.In the last year, the Government has therefore focussed on developing appropriate performanceframeworks, coupled with support mechanisms, to improve future levels of performance both localauthorities and regional bodies.

65. Incentivising increased action by LAs needs to be consistent with the Government’s approach togiving LA’s greater flexibility to deliver on national priorities in the most eVective way for that locality asoutlined in the Local Government White Paper. The Government has stated that it is committed to arealignment of existing resources away from process, for example the preparation of reports, and towardsoutcomes such as measurable carbon savings, delivered in a way most appropriate for the local areas.Empowering LAs to address climate change also relies on a commitment by the UK Government to liftexisting burdens and empower LAs to deliver according to local circumstance.

66. A table at Annex A summarises and evaluates key policies implemented in England to support andenable local and regional action on climate change.


67. The new Planning Policy Statement (PPS): Planning and Climate Change puts tackling climatechange at the centre of what Government expects from good planning. That is why the PPS has been issuedas a supplement to PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development, which is central to the entire series ofplanning policy statements. This new emphasis on planning’s role in helping to confront the challenges ofclimate change, is supported by our Planning Reform Bill which includes a new duty on local authorities totake action on climate change through local plans.

68. Climate change—both mitigation and adaptation—will now be a key and integrating theme in plansand planning decisions. In particular, the PPS sets out a significant role for both regional and local planningin helping to speed up the shift to renewable and low-carbon energy, supporting our ambitions on zerocarbon development and helping shape places resilient to the impact of climate change.

69. Challenging councils to do more to support delivery of local renewable or local low-carbon energyis a key part of this. We expect councils to give a strategic lead through their spatial planning and developersto incorporate local renewable and low carbon energy, wherever viable.

70. The PPS builds on the “Merton rule” by requiring councils to have a policy which sets a percentageof the energy to be used in new development to come from decentralised and renewable or low-carbonenergy sources. These policies should be flexible enough to allow for a range of local solutions including atthe community level as well as those for individual homes or buildings. This means that Councils will stillbe able to continue with and adopt new “Merton style rules” although they must be tested as part of thedevelopment plan document.

71. We are calling our new policy in the PPS “Merton Plus” because we also expect tailored targets forsites where there are bigger opportunities than the council-wide target.

72. The preamble to the PPS makes clear that it does not seek to assemble all national planning policyrelevant or applicable to climate change, and should be read alongside the national PPS/G series. Wherethere is any diVerence in emphasis on climate change between the policies in this PPS and others in thenational series this is intentional and this PPS takes precedence.

73. The Impact Assessment supporting the PPS states that the primary benefit of the PPS will be to enablethe planning system to support the implementation of the Government’s other climate change policies andassociated emission reductions. These include the statutory emissions reductions set out in the ClimateChange Bill and the reduction in emissions expected as a result of the timetable for getting to zero carbonhomes by 2016 confirmed in Building a Greener Future.


Are local authorities meeting their duty to enforce building regulations in relation to environmental measures?Does the enforcement regime discourage non-compliance?

74. Building Regulations and the Building Control system, unlike planning, is a fully devolved service tothe Local Authorities which means we have little centralised data or evidence as there areUno mandatoryreporting requirements. Anecdotal evidence has shown that building control professionals tend to focus onissues that are critical to safety at the expense of newer regulations but we believe that the situation isimproving. A recent survey of LA showed that, of those projects approved with conditions, energy eYciencywas the second most common issue highlighted, after structure.

75. Local Authorities adopt a variety of techniques to enforce compliance over the course of a project,namely site inspections, communication, advice alongside more formal measures such as oral and writtenwarnings.

76. We are currently undertaking a review of building control and will be publishing a consultation paperin the new year on specific measures to help increase compliance. Enforcement options such as issuing ofstop notices and fixed monetary penalties are being considered, along with extending the time limit forprosecution.

77. For a small number of cases mismanagement or deliberate evasion requires the LA to take formalenforcement action—either requiring alteration or removal of non compliant building work or takingforward criminal prosecutions in the magistrates’ courts. There are time limits on these activities whichoperate as a disincentive to local authorities and the government isUcommitted to extending these time limitsto two years.

What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central government support forsharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, Salix Finance, theCarbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust play in providing support?

UK Climate Impacts Programme

78. The UK Government and devolved administrations provide funding to the UK Climate ImpactsProgramme which will be publishing new scenarios on climate change in the UK, in autumn 2008 along withtools to help organisations across the public sector use this information to assess and address risks.

79. The UKCIP has identified local authorities throughout the UK as priority stakeholders with regardto its work on climate impacts and adaptation. It has developed diVerent support arrangements for the LocalAuthorities within each of the Devolved Administrations and worked with them and the UK governmentto produce a guidance document entitled “Climate change and local communities—how prepared are you?”(UKCIP 2003).

80. Since then UKCIP work in England has been channelled largely through the NottinghamDeclaration Partnership. UKCIP was influential in the re-launch of the Declaration in 2005 and in thedevelopment of the Nottingham Declaration Action Pack (NDAP) tool. This was launched in Summer 2006and is an online-tool oVering guidance on the development of an Adaptation Action Plan. The NDAPinvites local authorities to make use of other UKCIP tools/publications including: Climate ChangeScenarios, Risk and Uncertainty Decision Making framework, Adaptation Wizard, Adaptation Case StudyDatabase, Business Areas Climate Impacts Assessment Tool, Local Climate Impacts Profile, etc. Thepotential of a Local Climate Impacts Profile (LCLIP) as a way of understanding local vulnerability hasrecently been recognised. Many authorities are now developing their own local profiles, with UKCIPencouragement and guidance.

81. In addition to the formal structured arrangements outlined above UKCIP oVers a range of trainingevents for councils and is constantly responding to requests for presentations and advice on adaptation tolocal authorities. In some cases UKCIP is able to provide these itself. In others it can call upon the regionalclimate change partnerships to provide this service. These partnerships now exist in all of the EnglishRegions and in each of the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, though inslightly diVerent formats.

RDAs

82. Regional Development Agencies have begun to share information on addressing climate change inthe regions. In 2007 they launched a joint publication “Tackling Climate Change in the regions” which setsout examples of action being taken by RDAs9 and their commitments to addressing the climate changeagenda.

9 http://www.englandsrdas.com/filestore/pdf/107639%20RDA%20Leaflet.pdf


The Local Government Best Practice Programme

83. The UK Government is currently developing the £4 million local government best practice supportprogramme which was announced in the UK Climate Change Programme 2006, jointly funded by CLG andDefra, will be delivered in alignment with the National Improvement and EYciency strategy, through thenew local authority led Regional Improvement and EYciency Partnerships and will aim to proactivelybenchmark the performance of local authorities on climate change and target those who need the most helpto raise their performance to support delivery of local area agreements.

The IDeA managed Beacon Scheme

84. The Beacon Scheme identifies authorities and their partners that are delivering the best services totheir local citizens and can teach others to do the same. In 2006 seven local authorities were successful inachieving beacon status for their work on delivering sustainable energy in their areas.

85. The beacon councils have demonstrated that authorities can be in the forefront of meeting thechallenge of climate change. They are doing this in a number of ways, through developing innovativesolutions to local generation and distribution of energy (Woking) through developing a holistic approachto community level approaches (Shropshire), through developing wide ranging delivery partnerships(Cornwall), through delivering better value for money in council services (Leicester and Lewisham) throughusing Eco-Management and Audit Tools to drive improvement (High Peak) and through developing publictransport to help reverse growth in traYc levels (Nottingham).

86. These local authorities in partnership with the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA),Defra and the BERR have worked together to produce a benchmark and toolkit that draws on their goodpractice. The benchmark and enables councils to evaluate their current performance against deliveringsustainable energy and the toolkit provides specific guidance to make improvements. This was published inJuly 2007.

87. A new theme on Tackling Climate Tackling Climate Change in round nine of the Beacon Scheme willbuild on the success of the Sustainable Energy theme widening our knowledge of successful authorities workon adapting to the eVects of climate change.

88. The UK Government also supports the regional and local delivery of carbon abatement activity byoVering funding to bodies such as the Carbon Trust, Salix Finance and the Energy Saving Trust who allplay a key part in supporting the public sector on delivering action to tackle climate change. We will continueto work with these organisations to encourage the development of support aligned to help local and regionalbodies to improve their responses to climate change.

Energy Saving Trust

89. The Energy Saving Trust (EST) oVers a range of advice, support and information to local authoritiesand registered social landlords. EST administers a number of programmes including Practical Help whichis a tailored source of information and support on delivering energy eYciency and sustainable energy to theircommunities.

90. The Energy Saving Trust website has a wealth of information including the latest news and events; agreat number of publications including case studies, policy summaries and briefing notes; details of sourcesof funding and other relevant organisations.

Carbon Trust

91. As well as delivering support to public sector through its Carbon Management programme and sitespecific surveys the Carbon Trust also provides publications and web tools such as the online actionplanning tools, down-loadable sector based fact sheets and a range of sector case studies and best practiseguidance notes.

92. Web-based online communities also facilitate opportunities to exchange best practice regardingcarbon reduction in the public sector. Their Networks business area allows customers to discuss carbonsaving technologies, debate solutions to successful behavioural change and react to incoming policy andlegislation.

Salix

93. Salix Finance has an important role to play in providing financial support to public sector bodies toinvest in energy eYciency. There is close working between the Carbon Trust and Salix, with many of theprojects identified through the Carbon Management Programme going on to receive funding from Salix.

94. Salix shares best practice through the production of case studies and also through the relationshipmanagers that work with public sector bodies to establish revolving loan funds and can share knowledgeand understanding of what has or hasn’t worked in diVerent projects.


The Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006—Energy Measures Report

95. The Energy Measures Report, published by BERR in 2007, seeks to pull together existing sources ofhelp and advice to local authorities on climate change and fuel poverty, such as EST’s practical help service,into one place. The guidance will assist Local Authorities to perform well against the new performanceindicators on climate change. In September 2007, BERR also made available a web-based report“Addressing Climate Change and Fuel Poverty—Energy Measures Information for Local Government”with various sections aimed at the parish and town council sector as well as various levels of English andWelsh Local Government.

96. Ministers from Defra, CLG and BERR recently wrote to local authority chief executives drawing theattention to their responsibilities under the Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006 and theReport.

97. Defra also published a document setting out how town and parish councils could exercise theirpowers under the Act. The booklet “Ways to tackle climate change—Parish and Town Councils—Act onCO2” briefly covered the Act including where further information could be obtained. Defra mailed a copyof the booklet all 8,700 parish councils and distributed it at a number of conferences. The booklet waspacked with ideas and case studies on how local communities could get involved and take action onclimate change.

Core Cities and Climate Change

98. Defra and CLG, working with the Core Cities Group, recently developed and signed a Jointdeclaration, which was launched at the Core Cities Summit in November. This document sets out how wewill work with the core cities develop the type of leadership and innovation that is needed to meet thechallenges posed by climate change in our major cities.

99. We are also providing £250,000 to pilot a new approach towards carbon management at a city levelacross the core cities and which will develop learning that will be of use to all cities. The Low Carbon CitiesProgramme (LCCP) The programme was developed (by EST and CT) and will provide lessons for localauthorities which could assist in supporting their new climate change functions as a response to new localgovernment performance framework.

Awards and recognition

100. In 2007 Defra sponsored the Local Government Chronicle sustainable community awards whichcontained a specific category on tackling climate change. This was aimed at those local authorities that haverecently begun engaging in the climate change agenda not only to reduce their own carbon emissions butalso those of their district. Recognition was given to councils that have shown local leadership and were ableto demonstrate the benefits to their community. The winners were Mendip District Council with GuildfordBorough Council being highly commended and Maidstone Borough Council and Middlesbrough beingcommended. It has continued its sponsorship of the event and the 2008 winners will be announced shortly.

21 January 2008


Ann

exA

EF

FE

CT

IVE

NE

SSO

FK

EY

PO

LIC

IES

SUPPO

RT

ING

LO

CA

LA

ND

RE

GIO

NA

LA

CT

ION

ON

CL

IMA

TE

CH

AN

GE

Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

EST

Key

Acc

ount

OVer

ing

targ

eted

Loc

alA

utho

rities

the

oppo

rtun

ity

tohe

lp20

07–0

8is

the

first

year

offu

llro

llout

ofth

eK

eyA

ccou

ntpr

ogra

mm

e,M

anag

emen

tPro

gram

me

redu

ceca

rbon

emission

san

dde

mon

stra

tele

ader

ship

inan

d30

Cou

ncil’

sar

ecu

rren

tly

mid

-way

thro

ugh

the

proc

essof

addr

essing

clim

ate

chan

geth

roug

ha

Key

Acc

ount

deve

lopi

nga

stra

tegi

cca

rbon

redu

ctio

nst

rate

gy.F

ulle

valu

atio

nw

illbe

appr

oach

.The

purp

ose

ofth

epr

ogra

mm

eis

tosu

ppor

tun

dert

aken

afte

rye

aron

eis

com

plet

ean

dso

data

isno

tye

tav

aila

ble,

coun

cils

tode

velo

pa

stra

tegi

cap

proa

chto

sust

aina

ble

butal

read

yC

ounc

ilsha

veid

entifie

din

itia

lopp

ortu

nities

forca

rbon

ener

gyac

ross

allt

heir

serv

ices

and

activi

ties

.re

duct

ion

cove

ring

,int

er-a

lia,h

ousing

,tra

nspo

rtan

dpo

licy

deve

lopm

ent.

The

Key

Acc

ount

prog

ram

me

com

plim

ents

the

Car

bon

Tru

stC

arbo

nM

anag

emen

tpr

ogra

mm

e,w

hich

focu

seson

own

esta

te.

EST

—Pra

ctic

alH

elp

The

Ene

rgy

Savi

ngT

rust

runs

the

Pra

ctic

alH

elp

serv

ice

The

Pra

ctic

alH

elp

serv

ice

cont

inue

sto

bew

ellu

tilis

ed,w

ith

96%

ofsp

ecifi

cally

forlo

cala

utho

rities

and

hous

ing

asso

ciat

ions

.C

ounc

ilsaw

are

ofan

dus

ing

the

serv

ice.

Loc

alau

thor

ity

oYce

rsan

dT

hisfr

eese

rvic

egi

vesa

sing

leco

ntac

tpo

intw

here

you

can

mem

bers

have

utili

sed

free

rese

arch

,had

acce

ssto

publ

icat

ions

and

case

getin

form

atio

nan

dsu

ppor

tto

help

driv

efo

rwar

dst

udie

s,an

dov

er60

pres

enta

tion

san

dw

orks

hops

have

been

held

,su

stai

nabl

een

ergy

initia

tive

s.It

can

prov

ide

info

rmat

ion

cove

ring

the

rang

eof

ener

gyeY

cien

cyan

dca

rbon

redu

ctio

nar

eas.

EST

and

advi

ceon

ara

nge

ofto

pics

incl

udin

gst

rate

gic

driv

ers,

are

findi

ngth

aten

quirie

sto

the

serv

ice

are

beco

min

gm

ore

com

plex

,fu

ndin

g,an

dm

easu

resw

hich

can

beim

plem

ente

d.re

flect

ing

ara

isin

gof

the

barin

term

sof

know

ledg

ean

daw

aren

essin

the

field

.Wor

ksho

psar

eco

rres

pond

ingl

ybe

com

ing

mor

ein

-dep

th.

Qua

ntitat

ive

eval

uation

iscu

rren

tly

inpr

ogre

ss,a

ddre

ssin

gth

edi

Ycu

ltof

issu

eof

how

toat

trib

ute

dire

ctca

rbon

savi

ngsto

advi

cese

rvic

es.

EST

—R

egio

nalS

uppo

rtE

nerg

ySa

ving

Tru

stha

sde

velo

ped

wor

king

part

ners

hips

Six

regi

onsha

vebe

ense

lect

edfo

rcl

ose

wor

kR

egio

nalS

teer

ing

Gro

up.

with

regi

onal

bodi

esin

each

ofth

eE

nglis

hre

gion

s.E

STT

oda

teon

ere

gion

(Sou

thW

est)

hassign

edup

toa

low

carb

onho

usin

gha

ssu

ppor

ted

the

incl

usio

nof

sust

aina

ble

ener

gyin

action

plan

.Thr

eefu

rthe

rre

gion

sar

ede

velo

ping

sim

ilarac

tion

plan

sre

gion

alho

usin

g,ec

onom

ican

dsp

atia

lstr

ateg

iesan

dha

vefo

rag

reem

entby

stak

ehol

ders

.In

addi

tion

regi

onal

wor

ksho

psha

veas

sist

edth

ees

tabl

ishm

entof

regi

onal

grou

ps/p

artn

ersh

ips

been

held

onbu

ildin

gcl

imat

ech

ange

into

Loc

alA

rea

Agr

eem

ents

,th

atde

velo

pac

tion

plan

sfo

rdo

mes

tic

ener

gyan

dcl

imat

elin

king

LA

sw

ith

GO

s,R

DA

san

dR

As,

and

ana

tion

alco

nfer

ence

chan

ge.

cove

red

area

ssu

chas

new

build

,pla

nnin

g,th

epe

rfor

man

cefr

amew

ork

and

impr

ovin

gun

ders

tand

inig

betw

een

regi

onal

bodi

esan

dlo

cal

auth

oritie

s.A

llE

nglis

hre

gion

albo

dies

are

also

prov

ided

with

are

gula

re-

new

spu

blic

atio

n.

EST

—C

afe

Info

rmat

ion,

Supp

ort,

Adv

ice,

Tra

inin

gT

here

are

3,50

0m

embe

rsof

Caf

eac

ross

the

UK

,with

mem

bers

hip

ontr

ack

togr

owto

4,50

0by

2008

.Caf

eha

she

lped

indi

vidu

als,

com

mun

ity

grou

psan

den

ergy

prof

ession

alseq

uip

them

selv

esto

deliv

erca

rbon

savi

ngso

lution

son

the

grou

nd,s

uch

aslo

calm

icro

-ren

ewab

lepr

ojec

ts.

Asw

ella

sad

vice

,gui

danc

e,su

ppor

tan

dsign

post

ing

tofu

ndin

g,ca

feis

also

wor

king

stra

tegi

cally

with

orga

nisa

tion

sin

clud

ing

the

Chu

rch

of


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Eng

land

and

the

Wom

ensIn

stitut

eto

utili

seth

eirm

embe

rfr

amew

ork

toen

cour

age

and

galv

anise

action

onca

rbon

redu

ctio

nby

leve

ragi

ngth

eus

eof

thes

eor

gani

sation

’sin

fras

truc

ture

s.E

STIn

nova

tion

Pro

gram

me

Gra

ntsu

ppor

tsc

hem

eto

prov

ide

fund

ing

assist

ance

toT

heIn

nova

tion

Pro

gram

me

isno

win

itsla

stye

arw

ith

alls

chem

esto

bere

new

able

ener

gyor

ener

gyeY

cien

cyim

plem

enta

tion

clos

edby

the

end

ofth

efin

anci

alye

ar.A

sat

the

end

ofD

ecem

berth

esc

hem

esan

dfe

asib

ility

stud

ies

prog

ram

me

had

fund

ed16

0fe

asib

ility

stud

iesan

d68

impl

emen

tation

sche

mes

with

33im

plem

enta

tion

sche

mes

still

outs

tand

ing.

Car

bon

Tru

st—

Car

bon

Thr

ough

Car

bon

Surv

eysth

eC

arbo

nT

rust

prov

ides

CT

have

wor

ked

with

over

half

ofth

eL

Ase

ctor

iden

tify

ing

onav

erag

eSu

rvey

spr

actica

ladv

ice

and

guid

ance

toL

ocal

Aut

horities

.Afr

ee10

00tC

O2pe

rsu

rvey

.vi

sitby

ain

depe

nden

t,ac

cred

ited

cons

ulta

ntid

entifie

sen

ergy

savi

ngsop

port

unitie

sfr

omsim

ple

low

orno

-cos

tto

inve

stm

ents

that

pay

forth

emse

lves

withi

n1–

3ye

ars.

Car

bon

Tru

st-L

ocal

Thi

sis

asy

stem

atic

five-

step

prog

ram

me

prov

idin

ga

Thi

spr

ogra

mm

eha

sgr

own

subs

tant

ially

over

the

last

four

year

sw

ith

´

Aut

hority

Car

bon

stra

tegi

cvi

ewof

how

carb

onim

pact

sth

eor

gani

sation

byof

the

LA

sect

orno

wha

ving

deve

lope

dC

arbo

nM

anag

emen

tM

anag

emen

t(L

AC

M)

iden

tify

ing

the

risk

san

dop

port

unitie

sas

soci

ated

with

Impl

emen

tation

Pla

ns.T

hepr

ogra

mm

eno

wsu

ppor

ts45

larg

eco

unci

lscl

imat

ech

ange

.It’sa

holis

tic

appr

oach

perye

ar.

invo

lvin

gst

aVin

alla

reas

and

impo

rtan

tly

requ

ires

seni

orT

heL

AC

Mpr

ogra

mm

eha

sto

date

iden

tifie

d57

0,00

0tC

O2an

dov

erm

anag

emen

tsu

ppor

t.F

ocus

ing

onpe

erm

ento

ring

and

£43

mill

ion.

know

ledg

esh

arin

gbe

twee

npu

blic

sect

orbo

dies

,the

prog

ram

me

brin

gsch

ange

man

agem

entan

dte

chni

cal

expe

rtise

tohe

lpL

Asde

velo

plo

ng-ter

mst

rate

gies

for

carb

onsa

ving

s.C

arbo

nT

rust

—W

ebse

rvic

es,

ww

w.c

arbo

ntru

st.c

o.uk

enab

lesL

Asto

acce

ssa

who

leC

urre

ntly

x75

0un

ique

LA

web

regi

stra

tion

spe

rye

arac

cess

the

CT

publ

icat

ions

and

tele

phon

era

nge

ofse

lf-a

sses

smen

tto

ols,

guid

esan

ddi

rect

orie

s.w

ebsite

tout

ilise

the

onlin

eac

tion

plan

ning

tool

san

dac

cess

itson

line

advi

ceT

heC

arbo

nT

rust

publ

ishe

sfa

ctsh

eets

,cas

est

udie

san

dgu

idan

ce.

in-d

epth

guid

esta

ilore

dto

LA

s.It

isth

ela

rges

tlib

rary

ofPub

licat

ions

onse

ctor

and

tech

nolo

gyba

sespr

ovid

eke

yad

vice

toL

As.

inde

pend

entad

vice

onen

ergy

eYci

ency

inth

eU

K.

Asign

ifica

ntnu

mbe

rof

LA

sac

ross

the

UK

acce

sspr

actica

lcar

bon

The

Car

bon

Tru

st’s

Con

tact

Cen

tre

oVer

sfr

eete

leph

one

savi

ngad

vice

and

guid

ance

from

the

Car

bon

Tru

st’s

Con

tact

Cen

tre.

advi

ceon

any

aspe

ctof

ener

gysa

ving

thro

ugh

itte

amex

perien

ced

acco

untm

anag

ers.

Car

bon

Tru

st—

Onl

ine

CT

runs

aw

eb-b

ased

onlin

eco

mm

unity,

the

LA

Net

wor

k,O

ver1,

000

subs

crib

erspa

rtic

ipat

ew

ithi

nth

ison

line

com

mun

ity.

Itha

sC

omm

unity

“LA

Net

wor

k”w

hich

oVer

sus

eful

fora

inw

hich

todi

scus

sca

rbon

savi

ngse

rved

asan

inva

luab

leco

mm

unic

atio

nch

anne

lto

and

betw

een

LA

sso

tech

nolo

gies

;deb

ate

solu

tion

sfo

rbe

havi

oura

lcha

nge,

and

asto

diss

emin

ate

carb

onsa

ving

oppo

rtun

itie

s.re

actto

inco

min

gpo

licy

and

legi

slat

ion.

Fre

eto

all

part

icip

ants

.


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Car

bon

Tru

st—

Des

ign

Ava

ilabl

efr

omth

eC

arbo

nT

rust

,thi

ssp

ecia

listse

rvic

eU

ptak

eof

this

serv

ice

hasbe

enst

rong

with

robu

stca

rbon

savi

ngsbe

ing

Adv

ice

incl

udes

ade

taile

dpr

inte

dgu

ide

and

face

-to-

face

iden

tifie

dw

ith

very

long

asso

ciat

edpe

rsiste

nce

fact

ors.

cons

ulta

ncy.

Itw

illhe

lpto

iden

tify

the

carb

onsa

ving

sin

new

and

reno

vation

build

ing

proj

ects

,oVer

ing

free

orsu

bsid

ised

cons

ulta

ncy

advi

ceth

roug

hout

the

proj

ect

stag

es.A

free

Bui

ldin

gD

esig

nA

dvic

eG

uide

cont

ains

deta

iled,

prac

tica

ladv

ice

abou

tpr

ocur

ing

ener

gyeY

cien

tbu

ildin

gs—

from

deci

ding

onth

erigh

tte

chno

logi

esto

com

mission

ing

and

mai

nten

ance

—es

sent

ialr

eadi

ngfo

ran

yone

invo

lved

incr

eating

orad

apting

envi

ronm

enta

llyfr

iend

ly,n

on-d

omes

tic

build

ings

.C

arbo

nT

rust

—Par

tner

ship

sC

arbo

nT

rust

Ent

erpr

ises

esta

blishe

dPar

tner

ship

sfo

rPfR

iscu

rren

tly

wor

king

with

over

100

publ

icse

ctor

bodi

es.

forR

enew

able

s(C

arbo

nR

enew

able

s(P

fR)to

wor

kin

part

ners

hip

with

publ

icT

rust

Ent

erpr

ises

Lim

ited

)se

ctor

bodi

esto

deve

lop,

cons

truc

tan

dop

erat

eon

site

rene

wab

leen

ergy

proj

ects

,with

ata

rget

of50

0MW

ofpr

ojec

tsin

deve

lopm

entin

five

toei

ghtye

ars.

Def

raha

spr

ovid

ed£1

0m

illio

nby

way

ofse

edfu

ndin

g,w

ith

the

rem

aini

ng£5

00m

illio

nof

inve

stm

entre

quired

bein

gle

vera

ged

from

the

priv

ate

sect

or.

Salix

Fin

ance

Salix

Fin

ance

isan

inde

pend

ent,

publ

icly

fund

edco

mpa

ny,

—T

he£4

mill

ion

Loc

alA

utho

rity

Ene

rgy

Fin

anci

ng(L

AE

F)pi

lot

setup

in20

04,t

oac

cele

rate

publ

icse

ctor

inve

stm

entin

sche

me

was

laun

ched

with

19L

Asin

2004

.en

ergy

eYci

ency

tech

nolo

gies

thro

ugh

inve

stto

save

—Sa

lixre

ceiv

eda

furt

her£1

6min

fund

ing

for20

06/0

8w

hich

allo

wed

sche

mes

.Sal

ixha

spu

blic

fund

ing

from

the

Car

bon

Tru

stth

epi

lotto

bero

lled

outto

afu

llpr

ogra

mm

ean

dto

brin

gin

othe

ran

dis

wor

king

acro

ssth

epu

blic

sect

orw

ith

Loc

alpa

rtsof

the

publ

icse

ctor

.A

utho

rities

,NH

SF

ound

atio

nT

rust

s,H

ighe

ran

dF

urth

er—

Salix

are

wor

king

curr

ently

with

53L

Asac

ross

Eng

land

and

Wal

esE

duca

tion

inst

itut

ions

and

Cen

tral

Gov

ernm

ent.

with

com

mitte

dfu

ndin

gfr

omSa

lixof

£10.

6m

illio

n.T

hero

leof

Salix

isto

help

publ

icse

ctor

orga

nisa

tion

s—

Acr

ossth

epu

blic

sect

or90

0Sa

lixen

ergy

savi

ngpr

ojec

tsar

ein

redu

ceca

rbon

emission

sth

roug

hca

pita

linv

estm

entin

plac

eth

atar

esa

ving

180

000

tonn

esof

CO

2,50

%of

whi

chha

sbe

enen

ergy

savi

ngpr

ojec

ts.S

alix

prov

ides

inte

rest

-fre

e,sa

ved

inth

ecu

rren

tfin

anci

alye

ar.

mat

ched

fund

ing,

with

the

fund

stru

ctur

edso

that

the

ener

gysa

ving

spa

yth

eca

pita

lpro

ject

cost

back

over

tim

e.Sa

lixbe

gan

asa

pilo

tw

ith

Loc

alA

utho

rities

.The

pilo

tw

asa

succ

essan

dSa

lixw

assu

bseq

uent

lym

ade

anin

tegr

alpa

rtof

the

UK

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Pro

gram

me.

By

the

end

ofth

ecu

rren

tfin

anci

alye

arSa

lixex

pect

sto

bem

anag

ing

fund

sw

orth

upto

£40m

into

tali

n80

–100

clie

nts.


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Mun

icip

alW

aste

Pol

icy

Mun

icip

alw

aste

cont

ribu

tesar

ound

10%

nation

ally

toM

unic

ipal

was

tetr

eatm

entsa

ved

anes

tim

ated

net0.

5m

illio

nto

nnes

cont

rolle

dw

aste

arisin

gs.L

ocal

auth

oritie

sar

eke

yca

rbon

equi

vale

ntin

2006

–07.

deliv

erer

sof

impr

ovem

ents

tom

unic

ipal

was

teM

unic

ipal

was

teha

sgr

own

sign

ifica

ntly

less

than

GD

Psinc

e20

00;

man

agem

ent.

Mun

icip

alw

aste

cont

ribu

testo

clim

ate

mun

icip

alw

aste

incr

ease

dat

abou

t3.

5%pe

rye

arup

toth

em

illen

nium

chan

gedi

rect

lyth

roug

hm

etha

neem

ission

sfr

omla

ndfil

lsbu

tav

erag

egr

owth

over

the

last

five

year

sha

sbe

enle

ssth

an0.

5%pe

ran

din

dire

ctly

thro

ugh

ineY

cien

tus

eof

reso

urce

san

dye

ar.

mat

eria

ls.T

hela

ndfil

lallo

wan

cestr

adin

gsc

hem

e(L

AT

S)R

ecyc

ling

and

com

post

ing

ofho

useh

old

was

teha

sm

ore

than

isre

duci

ngth

eam

ount

ofm

etha

nepr

oduc

ing

was

tequ

adru

pled

sinc

e19

96–9

7;lo

cala

utho

rities

have

exce

eded

the

2005

land

fille

dby

loca

laut

horities

.Sta

tuto

ryB

VPIre

cycl

ing

nation

alho

useh

old

was

tere

cycl

ing

and

com

post

ing

targ

etof

25%

setin

targ

etsha

veal

soin

crea

sed

the

amou

ntof

hous

ehol

dw

aste

Was

teSt

rate

gy20

00ac

hiev

ing

31%

in20

06–0

7.re

cycl

ed.T

hena

tion

alW

aste

Stra

tegy

,pub

lishe

dM

ayT

heam

ount

ofho

useh

old

was

teno

tre

-use

d,re

cycl

edor

com

post

edfe

ll20

07,i

ncre

ased

the

focu

sof

futu

reac

tion

son

was

teby

23%

betw

een

2000

and

2005

–06

from

450

kilo

gram

spe

rhe

adto

367

prev

ention

and

min

imisat

ion.

The

new

loca

lgov

ernm

ent

kilo

gram

spe

rhe

ad.

perf

orm

ance

fram

ewor

k,L

AT

S,re

mov

ing

the

ban

onL

essm

unic

ipal

was

teis

bein

gla

ndfil

led—

with

falls

from

82%

to58

%fo

rw

aste

colle

ctio

nau

thor

itie

sch

argi

ngfo

rth

eco

llect

ion

ofm

unic

ipal

was

tebe

twee

n19

98–9

9an

d20

06–0

7.ho

useh

old

was

tein

upto

5pi

lotar

easan

dth

ela

ndfil

ltax

Pub

licaw

aren

essof

recy

clin

gha

sgr

own

with

over

half

the

popu

lation

esca

lato

rw

illen

sure

that

key

mun

icip

alw

aste

perf

orm

ance

cons

ider

ing

them

selv

esco

mm

itte

dre

cycl

ers.

mea

sure

sco

ntin

uein

the

righ

tdi

rect

ion.

Cur

rent

UK

recy

clin

gof

pape

r,gl

ass,

plas

tics

,alu

min

ium

and

stee

lis

estim

ated

tosa

vem

ore

than

18m

illio

nto

nnes

ofca

rbon

diox

ide

aye

arth

roug

hav

oide

dpr

imar

ym

ater

ialp

rodu

ctio

n(e

quiv

alen

tto

annu

alus

eof

5m

illio

nca

rsor

14%

ofU

Ktr

ansp

ortse

ctor

emission

s).

Ene

rgy

EY

cien

cyE

EC

isa

lega

lobl

igat

ion

upon

ener

gysu

pplie

rsto

mee

tA

sE

EC

isa

nation

alsc

hem

e,m

easu

red

and

mon

itor

edon

ana

tion

alC

omm

itm

ent(E

EC

)ta

rget

sfo

rim

prov

emen

tsin

ener

gyeY

cien

cyam

ong

basis,

itis

diY

cult

tom

easu

reitsim

pact

ata

loca

llev

el.H

owev

eren

ergy

(200

2–05

and

2005

–08)

hous

ehol

dsin

Gre

atB

rita

in.T

here

are

nodi

rect

regi

onal

supp

liers

have

deve

lope

deV

ective

and

crea

tive

appr

oach

esw

ith

ara

nge

orlo

calr

equi

rem

ents

,but

ener

gysu

pplie

rsw

ork

with

aof

LA

seg

coun

cilt

axre

bate

sche

mes

.ra

nge

ofde

liver

ypa

rtne

rsin

clud

ing

Loc

alA

utho

rities

.


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Dec

entH

omes

Ens

urin

gth

atho

mes

have

both

eYci

enthe

atin

gan

dT

heD

ecen

tH

omes

prog

ram

me

hasha

da

sign

ifica

ntan

dde

mon

stra

ble

eVec

tive

insu

lation

isan

inte

gral

part

ofth

eD

ecen

tH

omes

impa

cton

the

ther

mal

eYci

ency

ofho

usin

gin

the

soci

alse

ctor

.st

anda

rd.

The

soci

alse

ctor

hasan

aver

age

rating

of57

,com

pare

dto

46in

the

The

Dec

entH

omes

Stan

dard

hasha

lved

the

num

berof

priv

ate

sect

or.

hom

esin

the

soci

alse

ctor

that

prov

ide

inad

equa

teth

erm

alT

heso

cial

sect

orha

sim

prov

edm

ore

than

the

priv

ate

sect

orsinc

e19

96,

com

fort

.rising

10po

ints

upth

ein

dex.

The

priv

ate

sect

orha

srise

non

lyfiv

eT

heB

uild

ing

Res

earc

hE

stab

lishm

entre

port

onpo

ints

over

the

sam

epe

riod

.Im

plem

enting

Dec

entH

omes

inth

eSo

cial

Sect

orst

ated

Alm

ostal

lsoc

ials

ecto

rho

usin

g(9

6%)ha

sa

rating

ofm

ore

than

30.

that

man

yof

the

land

lord

ssu

rvey

edw

ere

wor

king

toa

The

aver

age

SAP

scor

efo

rso

cial

hous

ing

in20

05w

asU57

com

pare

dhi

gher

stan

dard

than

just

basic

dece

ncy.

Thi

sis

espe

cial

lyto

U47

in19

96(2

005

met

hodo

logy

).tr

uein

rega

rdsto

ener

gyim

prov

emen

tw

orks

,whe

reth

eIn

the

soci

alse

ctor

the

num

berof

dwel

lings

with

aSA

Pof

30or

less

has

vast

maj

ority

ofla

ndlo

rds’

Dec

entH

omes

prog

ram

mes

been

subs

tant

ially

redu

ced

sinc

e19

96,f

rom

over

14%

ofth

est

ock

to(o

ver90

%)in

clud

eda

prov

isio

nto

inst

allb

oth

cavi

tyw

all

only

4%in

2005

[SA

P20

05m

etho

dolo

gy].

and

loft

insu

lation

wel

lin

exce

ssof

the

min

imum

sse

tou

tin

the

stan

dard

.B

eaco

nsSc

hem

ean

dC

limat

eT

heB

eaco

nsSc

hem

eis

abe

stpr

actice

prog

ram

me

that

The

2005

“Sus

tain

able

Ene

rgy”

Bea

cons

have

crea

ted

abe

nchm

ark

and

Cha

nge

Bes

tPra

ctic

ere

cogn

ises

and

rew

ards

exce

llenc

ein

best

valu

eau

thor

itie

sto

olki

tto

help

othe

rsto

prov

ide

loca

lsol

utio

nsto

anin

tern

atio

nal

Pro

gram

me

indi

Ver

entth

emes

each

year

.A“s

usta

inab

leen

ergy

”pr

oble

m.T

hese

inte

rrel

ated

tool

sha

vehe

lped

coun

cils

eval

uate

thei

rth

eme

in20

05id

entifie

d7

Sust

aina

ble

Ene

rgy

Bea

cons

who

own

perf

orm

ance

and

prov

ide

guid

ance

forim

prov

emen

t.T

hese

have

been

wor

king

with

DE

FR

A,C

LG

and

the

IDeA

toB

eaco

nsha

veal

sobe

ensh

arin

gth

eirgo

odpr

actice

ina

rang

eof

diss

emin

ate

thei

rco

ntribu

tion

toth

eC

limat

eC

hang

ele

arni

ngac

tivi

ties

incl

udin

gar

ticl

esan

dfe

atur

es,w

ebsite

s,ev

ents

and

deba

tean

dhe

lpes

tabl

ish

apr

ogra

mm

eof

peer

supp

ort.

men

toring

.L

ocal

auth

oritie

sar

ecu

rren

tly

bein

gas

sess

edfo

rB

eaco

nst

atus

ina

new

“tac

klin

gcl

imat

ech

ange

”th

eme

whi

chw

illle

adto

awar

dsin

Mar

ch20

08.T

histh

eme

will

build

onth

ew

ork

ofth

esu

stai

nabl

een

ergy

beac

onsan

dle

adth

ew

ayfo

rjo

intC

LG

—D

EF

RA

£4m

illio

nC

limat

eC

hang

eB

est

Pra

ctic

epr

ogra

mm

e.H

ome

Ene

rgy

Con

serv

atio

nH

EC

Aha

sbe

ensu

cces

sful

inra

isin

gth

epr

ofile

ofH

EC

Ada

taas

repo

rted

byE

nerg

yC

onse

rvat

ion

Aut

horities

inE

ngla

ndA

ct(1

995)

dom

estic

ener

gyeY

cien

cyfo

rlo

cala

utho

rity

action

.in

the

period

1A

pril

1996

to31

Mar

ch20

06re

port

san

over

all

HE

CA

hasre

cent

lybe

enre

view

ed(s

ee:w

ww

.def

ra.g

ov.u

k/im

prov

emen

tin

dom

estic

ener

gyeY

cien

cyof

appr

oxim

atel

y19

.26%

asco

rpor

ate/

cons

ult/he

ca/in

dex.

htm

)m

easu

red

agai

nsta

1996

base

line.


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Bui

ldin

gR

egul

atio

nsIt

take

sab

outa

year

forth

eho

use-

build

ing

indu

stry

toN

/A(e

nfor

cem

ent)

com

plet

eex

isting

deve

lopm

ents

and

star

tw

orki

ngto

new

regu

lation

s.T

here

fore

mea

ning

fule

valu

atio

nca

nnot

take

plac

efo

rat

leas

ta

year

afte

rne

wre

gula

tion

sar

ein

trod

uced

.CL

Gan

dD

efra

are

inth

epr

oces

sof

lettin

ga

cont

ract

foran

inde

pend

entas

sess

men

tof

com

plia

nce

with

Par

tL

(200

6).T

hisw

illin

form

the

furt

heram

endm

ents

toPar

tL

that

the

Gov

ernm

entha

sco

mm

itte

dto

.O

ther

action

sar

eal

socu

rren

tly

unde

rway

toco

nsid

erho

wco

mpl

ianc

eac

ross

the

who

leof

the

build

ing

regu

lation

sca

nbe

impr

oved

thro

ugh

ourre

view

ofbu

ildin

gco

ntro

l.T

hisre

view

incl

udes

prop

osal

sfo

ra

mor

eeV

ective

risk

base

dap

proa

chto

insp

ection

and

aw

ider

rang

eof

mor

eeV

ective

sanc

tion

sfo

rB

uild

ing

Con

trol

OY

cers

such

asth

epo

wer

toissu

est

opno

tice

san

dhe

avie

rfin

es.

War

mF

ront

and

fuel

War

mF

ront

isa

key

inst

rum

entin

alle

viat

ing

fuel

pove

rty

Ove

r1.

6m

illio

nho

useh

olds

have

been

assist

edin

Eng

land

sinc

eth

epo

vert

ypr

ogra

mm

esin

Eng

land

bypr

ovid

ing

gran

tsfo

rhe

atin

gan

din

sula

tion

Sche

me’

sin

cept

ion

in20

00.B

yth

een

dof

this

CSR

period

,ove

r£1

.6m

easu

resto

vuln

erab

leho

useh

olds

.bi

llion

will

have

been

spen

ton

the

Sche

me.

Com

mun

ity

Ene

rgy

CE

EF

isa

com

petitive

fund

ing

prog

ram

me

whi

chw

asA

tota

lof11

9bi

dsw

ere

mad

ew

ith

ava

lue

inex

cess

of£1

1m

illio

n,w

ith

EY

cien

cyF

und

(CE

EF

)de

velo

ped

inre

spon

seto

the

Cha

ncel

lor’san

noun

cem

ent

50pr

ojec

tsac

ross

Eng

land

awar

ded

fund

ing.

Asth

isfu

ndin

gw

ason

lyof

fund

ing

(£6.

3m

illio

nin

Eng

land

)to

impr

ove

the

awar

ded

during

the

curr

entye

arit

isto

oea

rly

tore

port

onth

eim

pact

ofde

liver

yof

War

mF

ront

and

the

Ene

rgy

EY

cien

cyth

efu

ndin

g,ho

wev

erit

isan

tici

pate

dth

atth

ese

proj

ects

will

reac

hov

erC

omm

itm

ent,

atth

elo

call

evel

.60

0,00

0ho

useh

olds

over

the

next

thre

eye

ars.


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Low

Car

bon

Bui

ldin

gsL

CB

Ppr

ovid

esgr

ants

tow

ards

the

inst

alla

tion

ofL

CB

PPha

se1

(non

-dom

estic)

Pro

gram

me

mic

roge

nera

tion

tech

nolo

gies

forho

useh

olds

,com

mun

ity

Exp

ress

ions

ofin

tere

stgr

oups

,pub

lic,p

riva

tean

dth

ird

sect

oror

gani

sation

s.T

otal

%2,

747

(£20

7m

illio

n)L

CB

PPha

se1,

whi

chis

man

aged

byth

eE

nerg

ySa

ving

LA

’s%

328

(£30

mill

ion)

Tru

st,o

rigi

nally

had

a£3

0m

illio

nbu

dget

with

x£2

0G

rant

appl

icat

ions

mill

ion

setas

ide

forno

n-do

mes

tic

proj

ects

incl

udin

glo

cal

Tot

al%

650

(£32

.5m

illio

n)au

thor

itie

s.W

ithi

nsix

mon

thsof

laun

ch,t

hefu

nd’s

LA

’s%

92(£

7.1

mill

ion)

allo

cation

fordo

mes

tic

proj

ects

over

thre

eye

arsha

dbe

enG

rant

oVer

sco

mm

itte

din

full.

Asa

resu

lt,t

heG

over

nmen

tap

prov

edT

otal

%32

3(£

11.5

mill

ion)

the

re-a

lloca

tion

of£6

mill

ion

from

the

non-

dom

estic

LA

’s%

49(£

1.7

mill

ion)

fund

ing

stre

amsto

supp

ortth

edo

mes

tic

stre

am.

Inth

eB

udge

t20

07,a

nad

dition

al£6

mill

ion

inne

wm

oney

Gra

ntspa

idw

asm

ade

avai

labl

eto

dom

estic

proj

ects

asa

resu

ltof

Tot

al%

41(£

0.5

mill

ion)

high

erth

anan

tici

pate

dde

man

d.L

A’s

%7

((£0

.1m

illio

n)L

CB

PPha

se2,

man

aged

byth

eB

RE

,has

a£5

0m

illio

nW

ebsite

hits

tow

ww

.low

carb

onbu

ildin

gs.o

rg.u

kbu

dget

,pro

vidi

nggr

ants

tow

ards

the

inst

alla

tion

ofT

otal

%50

0,00

0m

icro

gene

ration

tech

nolo

gies

inpu

blic

and

third

sect

orN

opo

tent

ialc

arbo

nsa

ving

sun

derPha

se1,

and

mos

tpr

omot

ion

orga

nisa

tion

s.to

war

dsdo

mes

tic.

Gra

ntsof

betw

een

30%

–50%

are

avai

labl

ede

pend

ing

onth

ete

chno

logy

used

,with

appl

ican

tsne

edin

gto

secu

reL

CB

PPha

se2

(pub

lic,n

onpr

ofit)

mat

chfu

ndin

gfr

omot

herso

urce

sbe

fore

appl

ying

toth

eG

rant

appl

icat

ions

prog

ram

me.

Tot

al%

538

Upt

ake

hasbe

enslow

erth

anha

dbe

enho

ped.

We

cons

ider

LA

’s%

121

that

this

may

bedu

eto

the

follo

win

gfa

ctor

s:G

rant

oVer

s—

plan

ning

forth

issc

ale

ofpr

ojec

tta

kesa

cons

ider

able

Tot

al%

431

amou

ntof

tim

e,an

dth

esc

hem

eha

son

lybe

enop

enL

A’s

%10

8sinc

eD

ecem

ber20

06;

Gra

ntcl

aim

s—

appl

ican

tsar

eha

ving

diY

culty

obta

inin

gm

atch

Tot

al%

43fu

ndin

gin

addi

tion

toth

eL

CB

Pgr

ant;

and

LA

’s%

7—

fram

ewor

ksu

pplie

rsha

vere

quired

tim

eto

setup

thei

rW

ebsite

hits

tow

ww

.low

carb

onbu

ildin

gsph

ase2

.org

.uk

prom

otio

nala

ctiv

itie

s.T

otal

%86

,000

Pot

ential

carb

onsa

ving

s(a

llpu

blic

,non

profi

tor

gani

sation

s,al

lte

chno

logi

es)

Ann

ual%

1,46

6tC

O2

Lifet

ime

%32

,666

tCO

2

Pro

mot

ions

tolo

cala

utho

rities

incl

ude


Pol

icy

Com

men

tson

eVec

tive

ness

ofpo

licy

Qua

ntifi

able

eVec

tto

date

?

Clim

ate

Cha

lleng

eF

und

The

83gr

ant-fu

nded

proj

ects

unde

rth

eC

limat

eC

halle

nge

An

eval

uation

stra

tegy

hasbe

endr

awn

and

the

eval

uation

data

will

beF

und

(CC

F)ru

nun

tilt

heen

dof

Feb

ruar

y20

08.E

ach

colle

cted

from

the

proj

ects

inA

pril.

quar

ter(o

rev

ery

six

mon

thsfo

rsm

alle

rpr

ojec

ts)w

eas

sess

the

deliv

ery

ofth

epr

ojec

tsag

ains

tth

eirin

itia

lpro

posa

ls.

The

aim

ofth

eC

CF

isto

influ

ence

peop

le’s

attitu

des

tow

ards

clim

ate

chan

gein

apo

sitive

way

.Eac

hpr

ojec

tis

requ

ired

tosu

rvey

the

attitu

deof

thei

rta

rget

audi

ence

befo

rean

daf

terth

epr

ojec

t.A

tth

een

dof

the

CC

Fw

ew

illco

llate

and

anal

yse

this

eval

uation

data

toga

uge

how

eVec

tive

the

proj

ects

have

been

inin

fluen

cing

attitu

des.

Bio

-ene

rgy

Cap

ital

Gra

nts

The

purp

ose

ofth

isSc

hem

eis

tosu

ppor

tth

eeY

cien

tus

eL

ocal

and

regi

onal

auth

oritie

sha

vebe

enal

loca

ted

£4.6

56m

illio

nof

the

Sche

mes

ofbi

omas

sfo

ren

ergy

byst

imul

atin

gth

eea

rly

depl

oym

ent

£9m

illio

nav

aila

ble

in20

07–0

8.of

biom

ass-

fuel

led

heat

and

com

bine

dhe

atan

dpo

wer

proj

ects

.Pro

ject

sw

illbe

eval

uate

dag

ains

ta

rang

eof

criter

ia,i

nclu

ding

thei

rco

ntribu

tion

tore

duci

ngca

rbon

emission

s.Pro

ject

sfu

nded

toda

tew

illbe

eval

uate

dfo

llow

ing

com

plet

ion,

mos

tlik

ely

in20

09–1

0.D

efra

expe

ctsto

run

furt

herro

unds

ofth

eSc

hem

eup

to31

Mar

ch20

11,s

ubje

ctto

fund

ing

bein

gm

ade

avai

labl

eth

roug

hth

eC

ompr

ehen

sive

Spen

ding

Rev

iew

.Su

stai

nabl

eT

rave

lTow

nsT

hree

tow

nsof

Dar

lingt

on,P

eter

boro

ugh

and

Wor

cest

erT

hepr

ogra

mm

eha

sso

farta

rget

ed18

0,00

0pe

ople

and

achi

eved

a10

%ar

esh

arin

g£1

0mfr

om20

04-0

9to

look

atw

hata

sust

aine

dre

duct

ion

inca

rtr

ipsan

da

16%

incr

ease

inbu

sus

ew

ith

a20

%in

crea

sepr

ogra

mm

eof

smar

terch

oice

sm

easu

resca

nac

hiev

e.in

wal

king

and

a30

%in

crea

sein

cycl

ing.

Dar

lingt

onha

sal

soov

erSm

arte

rch

oice

sin

clud

ew

orkp

lace

and

scho

oltr

avel

10,0

00re

side

ntsin

its“L

ocal

Mot

ion”

sust

aina

ble

trav

elsu

ppor

ters

plan

ning

,car

shar

ing

sche

mes

,inc

reas

edw

alki

ngan

dcl

ub.

cycl

ing,

impr

oved

publ

ictr

ansp

ortpr

ovisio

nan

dm

arke

ting

incl

udin

gpe

rson

alised

trav

elpl

ans.

Cyc

ling

Dem

onst

ration

Fiv

eto

wns

ofB

righ

ton,

Dar

lingt

on,D

erby

,Exe

teran

dA

mon

itor

ing

regi

me

hasbe

enes

tabl

ishe

dbu

tit

isto

oea

rly

tom

ake

anT

owns

Pro

ject

Lan

cast

erar

eea

chre

ceiv

ing

£1.5

mill

ion

from

2005

–08

anal

ysis

ofth

ere

sults.

After

Sum

mer

2008

will

bein

apo

sition

tow

ith

a6t

hto

wn

Ayl

esbu

ryre

ceiv

ing

£900

k(a

ssm

alle

r)to

exam

ine

the

data

.te

stth

ehy

poth

eses

ofw

heth

erin

vest

ing

atle

vels

seen

insu

cces

sful

Eur

opea

ncy

clin

gci

ties

we

can

star

tto

see

ast

epch

ange

incy

clin

gin

Eng

land

.


Witnesses: Mr Phil Woolas MP, Minister of State (Environment), Mr James Hughes, Head of Climate andEnergy: Strategy and Public Sector, Department for Environment, Food and Rural AVairs, Mr Iain WrightMP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, and Mr Andrew Campbell, Director of Local StrategicPartnerships and Performance, Department of Communities and Local Government, gave evidence.

Q122 Chairman: Hello and welcome. I apologise forhaving kept you waiting for a few minutes. We willtry and get through as much as we can. I am veryglad to see two ministers here. We are delighted thereis recognition that these issues cross departmentallines. Do you just want to introduce your oYcials aswell before we start?Mr Woolas: Thank you very much indeed, Mr Yeo,for the invitation to today’s session. I am joined bymy colleague, James Hughes, who is Head ofClimate Change: Strategy and Public Sector inDefra, who is here to help the Committee with itsinquiry.Mr Wright: I am joined, Chairman, by AndrewCampbell, who is in charge of Local AreaAgreements at the Department of Communities andLocal Government.

Q123 Chairman: Thank you very much. Could I kickoV by asking how you think we could get moreconsistent action right across the whole of localgovernment and how we link the aspirational high-level strategy with the actions every day on theground?Mr Woolas: Can I try, Chairman, to answer thatquestion? The thrust of government policy towardsthis issue is a devolutionary one and there is aparadox between consistency and devolution, so theanswer to your question is that we have set aframework which we then within have to advocate.Now, of course, one of the key levers that areavailable to us is the reward grant system. Is it abribe or is it a tip, is an open-ended question, butthere is to a significant extent built into the policythis paradox. So persuasion as well as, obviously,financing become all-important and we believe thatby creating this framework of devolution throughthe new structure the accountability structures oflocal government and regional and devolvedgovernment are the answer to the question. I hopethat is an honest answer.Mr Wright: Can I just follow that up, Chairman, bysaying I do agree entirely with what Phil is sayingabout a tension between locally-decided targets,which are probably more committed to in terms oflocally on the ground and central diktat, and interms of the Local Government PerformanceFramework which Phil has just mentioned, I dothink we have got that balance right in terms of thenew framework with the Local Area Agreements,the 35 targets and the national indicators, which Iimagine we will come on to later. Also, in terms ofsome of the things which are on the statute book andare planned to be on the statute book in terms of thePlanning and Compulsory Purchase Act, whichmeans that local authorities have to have regard tomitigating and adapting with regards to climatechange and also the stuV which is going through interms of the Planning Bill, and it also tends to be thehalfway house between the planning policystatements, the guidance that we have put in place

with regard to that. So in terms of that overallframework and the tension we have, I do think wehave got it about right.

Q124 Chairman: One of the things that arenoticeable is that some of the best performance bycouncils is where you have got particularlycommitted individual oYcers or councillors whoreally grip the issue and regard it as cruciallyimportant. Are you relaxed about the sort ofvariation that may lead to between one authorityand another, or are there ways of actually getting thecommitment which some people have made part ofthe mainstream agenda so that everyone starts toshare as climate change itself becomes a greaterpriority in overall policy terms, both nationally andinternationally, whether that same process willhappen at a local level?Mr Wright: In preparing for this meeting,Chairman, I was looking at transcripts from yourprevious evidence sessions and I was struck by thephrase which was coming through time and timeagain about “wilful individuals” and I do think thatat both a member level in local authority and at anoYcer level that is a major driver in terms ofpriorities. I think it is very clear. I am a formercouncillor and I saw it when I was a boroughcouncillor. I think in many respects, because of theperformance framework we have put in place,because of the finances we are providing in terms ofmitigating and adapting to climate change, the keypoint in the jigsaw is cultural and I do think thatmove, in terms of wilful individuals, is probably theway in which culture can be changed. But in termsof bringing it together, in terms of highlighting anddisseminating best practice, I think Communitiesand Local Government is working on that to makesure that we do ensure that people can step up to theplate and do what they can in their own individualareas.Mr Woolas: Chairman, in specific performanceindicators that are Defra-led there are three in thisarea, 185, measuring local authority emissionscaused by their own operations, 186, whichmeasures per capita emissions from the area whichthe local authority covers, and 188, which is theadaptation indicator. Those are the three that weare, as you may expect, anxiously awaiting theoutcomes of the Local Area Agreementnegotiations. It is too early to say. The end of Juneis the sign-oV. The early indications are that a largenumber of local authorities are adopting orintending to adopt these PIs within their 35 targetindictors as part of the ones they can choose as partof the devolutionary regime, but it is going to be, Ithink, very important that that figure is as high aspossible and that the number who are not adoptingone or more of these is very small. The indicationsdo seem to be that that will be the case.Mr Wright: Just to expand on that, Chairman, if Imay, the latest information we have following thediscussions which are taking place with government


2 April 2008 Mr Phil Woolas MP, Mr James Hughes, Mr Iain Wright MP and Mr Andrew Campbell

oYce and local areas, certainly in terms of NI186,which is the per capita CO2 emissions in the localarea, is that this is in the top five priorities.Something like 120 local areas have indicated that,and I pay tribute to and embarrass Phil here bysaying that in terms of the work Defra has done inpushing that and demonstrating how important thatis, it certainly seems to have worked with regard tolocal authorities.

Q125 Colin Challen: Having served as a councillormyself for a few years, I am aware that councils, likethe rest of society, can go through phases andfashions and various stages of development, lookingat things, and then move on to the next, if you like,managerial craze. That, I think, can lead to a verypatchy situation where some authorities led by these“wilful individuals” can do a lot and others thatprobably just do not bother at all. Do you think thatthe statutory framework we have talked aboutalready is actually going to be strong enough to geteverybody up to speed at the same level, setting veryclear-sighted targets and demands for them?Perhaps, if you look at planning applications, forexample, whether or not they will have to be assessedfor their carbon balance, if you like, things of thatsort. Perhaps we need to go much further than youhave already suggested?Mr Woolas: I think the fear you have or the cautionyou have is real. We take the view that there is anumber of sticks as well as carrots. I have said it is adevolutionary regime, but it is not without its sticks.The evidence from PPS25, for example, onEnvironment Agency consultation on flood plaindevelopments, is that it started poorly and has builtinto the system, and of course the number of call-inshelps that, but I think the real cultural change willcome about when the carbon reduction commitmentkicks in, in April 2010, because that will draw thefinancial decision-making into the policy decision-making together in a central and mainstream wayand larger local authorities, will be covered by thecarbon reduction commitment (as will governmentdepartments). So that, I think, gives some suretyagainst the fear that this could go out of fashion.Mr Wright: I think that is a fair point and I think thepremise is right. We do not want to move on to thenext thing in terms of fashionable managementjargon and I think we need to embed this as much aspossible in the planning framework, in the statutoryframework, and I do think the performanceframework which we have in terms of localauthorities helps. I mentioned things which aregoing on in respect of the Planning Bill. I think thismay have changed subject to amendment, it is goingthrough the House at the moment, but clause 147does set out that local planning authorities mustinclude in the development plan documents policieswhich are designed to reassure people with regard tomitigation and adaptation about climate change. Sowe are embedding that. On top of planningstatements, on top of revised PPS on climate change,I think we are doing a lot to embed this in quiteliterally a sustainable way.

Q126 Colin Challen: Does the Government have aview on what areas local authorities should prioritiseto make the biggest climate change gains, so tospeak, or are areas chosen by serendipity, they justsuggest themselves, “We’re going to review planninglaw, so let’s put something in the planning law,” or,“We might do something on housing, so let’s thinkabout something in housing”? How does the policyon climate change between central and localgovernment emerge? It is presumably not just byosmosis but it is by a clear-sighted series ofpriorities?Mr Woolas: The regime, of course, will change ifParliament gives its approval to the Climate ChangeBill. That will have a major impact. The carbonbudgets which flow from that will have a majorimpact, along with the carbon reductioncommitment. But I think following that, going backto the previous answer, it is then dependent upon thesuite of performance indicators combined with thestatutory duty to cooperate on public sectorpartners, which will empower local authorities to beable to implement their targets. Part of the policies,of course, to recognise the importance of thequestion, is the diVerences in the diVerent areas.What you would do, say, in Iain’s area would bediVerent from what you would do in, say, inCornwall, to pick one at random, and I think theregime allows that to be recognised.Mr Wright: Following on from that again, I do thinkthat is very important. As a central governmentminister I do not want to be dictating, certainly inthe local devolutionary agenda which we have. Ithink what we can do, though, linking the twothemes of questioning so far in terms of that “wilfulindividual”, the cultural changes, we need toencourage as much as possible, I would suggest, thepicking oV of the low-hanging fruit. I think that is atheme which has emerged from the Committeealready. Particularly with regard to maybe localauthority sustainability of buildings, we can helpencourage a great deal of investment with regard toenergy eYciency and sustainability of buildings inthat way, because I think sometimes people thinkthat this issue of climate change is so big, so globalin its outlook, “What on earth can I do as anenvironmental oYcer in a local authority?” I think ifwe can encourage that and say that people can makea diVerence on an individual level, and help themwith things like the Energy Savings Trust, GreenHomes Service, that sort of thing, we can make a realdiVerence.

Q127 Colin Challen: Perhaps there is an argumentthat the Government’s role really should be—obviously it has a statutory role, but outside of thatit is just to try to strengthen the weakest link in thechain rather than possibly introduce legislationwhich holds back the strongest performance. I thinkthere was a bit of a debate about the Merton rulereally as to whether or not those local authoritieswhich really wanted to be fully responsible andforward-thinking might be held back by some kindof national standard. So perhaps the real role ofGovernment is to make sure that there is good



practice spread and to help the weakest links in thechain, because some local authorities clearly havenot got the agenda yet, get up to speed rather thansay that everybody should move at the same speed?Mr Woolas: I think that is right. Our policyrecognises that, though I think the new regime withthe indicators for local government is a profoundchange. We have a number of measures to try and dothat in a practical way rather than just the statutoryway. The Regional Improvement and EYciencyPartnership, for example, we have put £4 million, £2million each, I think, into that. There is the Beaconscheme, which is proving to be successful. There area number of measures which are helping to spreadbest practice, though I take the point that they arenot statutory. Of course, the proposal in the ClimateChange Bill on adaptation is that the Secretary ofState should be given powers in the area ofadaptation to do exactly what has been suggested,but that of course is subject to parliamentarydecision in the forthcoming debates in the House.Mr Wright: Chairman, Phil has mentioned thecarrots that we can provide. I would also say in termsof not so much the sticks but certainly the auditingand regulatory regime, the Committee willremember that we are changing the ComprehensivePerformance Assessment for local authorities to theComprehensive Area Assessment, which will belooking at risks and delivery options, and that will bea framework within which the way that a local areaand local authority and its partners can mitigate andadapt to climate change will be assessed as well. SoI think not only is it important to change thingsculturally but to have transparency in the wholeprocess. The CAA will help do that.

Q128 Mr Caton: Minister, in replying to Mr Challenyou referred to the duty which the Planning Bill willplace on local authorities to address mitigation andadaptation, and I am sure that is very welcome, butwhy does it not impose a similar duty on regionalplanning bodies in developing regional spatialstrategies and the proposed single regionalstrategies?Mr Wright: In terms of the Regional DevelopmentAgency, the 1998 Act has as one of the objects of theRegional Development Agency a duty with regardto sustainable development. I know that because Ilooked at the RDA Act when I was taking theHousing and Regeneration Bill through the Houserecently, because we have just produced, Chairman,an amendment this week with regard to sustainabledevelopment for the new Homes and CommunitiesAgency. I think that is important. Moving slightlyfurther afield from that, I think the proposed Sub-National Review and the proposed coming togetherof the regional economic strategy and the regionalspatial strategy into a single regional integratedstrategy will really make sure that the homes and thebuildings we need in order to pursue and facilitateeconomic development is very much linked together.I think at the heart of that, thanks to the objectswhich are already in there with regard to the RDAAct, sustainable development, economic

development which is as sustainable and green asmuch as possible, will be literally embedded. So Ihope that reassures you.

Q129 Mr Caton: I am not sure it does. Obviouslythat is very welcome, but that does not have thefocus on climate change, the provisions you have putin for local government, and I wonder why that is?Mr Wright: One of the things the RDAs have beendoing has been reviewing at the moment theirregional economic strategies and there has beenrenewed emphasis upon what are they doing inrespect of climate change, and there has been a lot ofgood work. I declare a vested interest to some extent,albeit historically, Chairman, because I used to workfor One North East, the North East RegionalDevelopment Agency. But ones such as EEDA (Eastof England Development Agency) and the WestMidlands one, Advantage West Midlands, areworking really quite well to make sure that climatechange is at the heart of what they are doing inrespect of economic development. As I have said, Ithink that will be a process which will be advancedand accelerated when we see the Sub-NationalReview pull together these major regionaldocuments in terms of the RES and the RSS.Mr Caton: Thank you.

Q130 Martin Horwood: We need a rocket under theSouth West RDA in that case—a sustainable one,obviously! I just want to ask you aboutprocurement, which I think is an area which hasenormous potential for having an impact outside thescope of local government itself. I have got an oYcesupplies company in my constituency which is tryingto reduce its carbon footprint by 75% in a few yearsand that is going to win it preferred status on someprivate sector contracts but not particularly incontracts with local government. What are youdoing to provide sticks or carrots to local authorityto look at their procurement policies as a way ofpromoting action on climate change?Mr Woolas: I launched the strategy, so I will tell youwhat we are trying to do, when I was in my previousportfolio at ODPM, I think it was then. The localgovernment sustainable procurement strategy setout the response to the recommendations of theSustainable Procurement Task Force, which wedeveloped with the Local Government Association,the Society of Procurement OYcers and otherstakeholders included the Academy ofSustainability, the IBA and others, to try and lookat how we could crack this problem of trying toensure that procurement promoted sustainabilitybut did not rely on the economies of scale whichcould deteriorate local sustainability. So it was localsustainability as well as sustainability that wasimportant because of the other objectives we had.For example, the PSA in regional economicstrategies does take sustainability into account. Sothe five points were trying to ensure that localauthorities and their partners’ mainstreamprocurement—we found there were diVerent levelsof procurement decisions, or rather decisions werebeing taken at diVerent levels, some of them at very



relatively low management levels, some of them atsenior, and that to build in sustainability you had tomake it a senior oYcer decision. Secondly, lookingat the evolution of the best value regime to ensurethat the full life cycle of a product or a service waspart of the criteria in awarding the contract orpurchasing the goods or service. There were all sortsof examples of that that you will be familiar with.Making sure that sustainability was manageriallyand politically owned by the senior oYcers and theelected members, that sustainability in procurementwas built into that, was a key recommendation. Theaction on construction and facilities management,social care, waste management, energy, transportand food. The final one was giving greater flexibilityto work with other partners, either acrossboundaries or within the boundaries. That is thegood practice that we are trying to bring about, butthe answer to your question is to be found in theanswer to the previous questions, that we believe thecarbon reduction commitment will change the wayin which public sector management behaves becauseit will make it part of the balance sheet and theincome and expenditure account.

Q131 Joan Walley: Can I just pick you up, Minister,on one of the things you just said as part of thatprocurement strategy, which has taken quite a lot oftime to get to this stage, and ask you know how thatsquares with Government policy in respect of PFI,which is for many local authorities the only way ofgetting long-term capital investment into aparticular area, when PFI contacts tend to be kind ofat a given time? So they might be providing ongoinginvestment for the next 30 years but they are stuckin stone really because they cannot adapt as the newenvironmental technologies come forward. Theycannot necessarily build those into the long-termplanning because it is all based on what the contractagreement was at the time when the PFI was drawnup, so many local authorities who are relying on PFIto provide the investment they need find that theyare stuck with something which is out of date.Mr Woolas: The traditional policy would be worsefrom that point of view, and secondly a PFI contactcan allow flexibility in that regard if it is negotiatedat the start of the PFI.

Q132 Joan Walley: And that is recognised from thesustainability aspect of it, is it?Mr Woolas: I would argue in general that with a PFIcontract, in part because it is more likely to be ontime and on budget, in part because it is explicit inwhat is expected but provides flexibility to bothpartners in delivery, there is a better chance of itbeing sustainable than it would otherwise be the caseon a traditional purchase. Time will tell!

Q133 Dr Turner: We are going to have nationaltargets, budgets set as a result of the Climate ChangeBill. Of course, these are going to have to bedelivered at a local level in practice, so under whatcircumstances do you think you might want todisaggregate targets and cascade national targets toother levels in spheres of government?

Mr Woolas: I think that is the $64,000 question,which I suspect is why you have asked it! The way inwhich in Defra we see the answer to that question—and James may want to comment on this—is that ofcourse we have not got the international agreementyet. We have the proposal in the UK ClimateChange Bill to look at a 60%, possibly or probably80% when we have got the advice of the Committeeon Climate Change as a UK contribution. You havethen got to find ways in the real world of deliveringthat and divvying it up. Sectoral approaches areobviously important. The climate changeagreements and the energy users and producerswhich are covered by the European trading schemeprovide for a portion of that, but underneath thatyou then start to divvy it up, and of course we havethe issue of the devolved administrations, whichyour inquiry, Chairman, is obviously looking at.Hypothetically, we will be in a situation wherebyjournalists and Members of the House will tot up thetargets of each local authority agreement and thedevolved administration and it may come to lessthan the national target. Of course, part of our pointin putting a statutory target into legislation is toensure that there is that delivery, that it “walks thewalk”, as the climate change negotiators say. But Ithink the issue you raise is absolutely the right issueand I think this is why this inquiry is so important,because this is looking at how we are going to do itin policy terms at a local authority level.Mr Hughes: Chairman, perhaps I could just make acouple of comments? First of all, just to say that wehave already discussed the tension between the needto give local areas greater formal responsibility fortackling climate change against the recognition thatthere is a greater devolved approach as well towardslocal authorities. I think what we have got with theindicators is a step change in terms of highlightingthe importance of climate change and action at alocal level, and obviously the action that we aretaking through Government OYces, through theLocal Strategic Partnership approach, the messagewe are getting through the LGA and others in termsof trying to get the Local Strategic Partnerships toembed climate change within their Local AreaAgreements, that is looking at targets. It is lookingat targets at a local level, looking at targets in thesense that the target at a local level needs to takeaccount of what can be done at that local level. Ourapproach in terms of the Climate Change Bill is tosay that the Climate Change Bill sets a framework.The framework it sets is one of setting out what theoverall target is for the UK. In terms of actuallytrying to meet that target, one of the things we havebeen very mindful of is that we want to try and getabatement at the least cost, we want it to be cost-eVective, and we need to have flexibility in achievingthat. I think the concern was that if we started tobreak that target up into lots and lots of sub-targetsthat actually it would become very complex tomanage and could cause problems in terms of ourflexibility and our ability to actually deliver carbonsavings at least cost. Again, formally cascading andbreaking up that target at a local level would also not



be consistent with giving local authorities greaterdevolution in their approach. So we have not takenthat approach, but I hope that explains why.

Q134 Dr Turner: But if local or regional governmentsets targets not necessarily with reference to thenational target, how do you see them relating to thenational target if they do not stack up to the nationaltarget? What will you do?Mr Woolas: As I say, I think that is the importantquestion which the country has to come to termswith and your recommendations will be veryimportant, but it is not the whole picture, of course,because within industrial sectors, the transportsector, the industrial sector and indeed the domesticsector, there will be other contributions. If one looksat—if I can pick the North East, if you will allow me,Iain—the North East, where the emissions for theregion are very high because of the industrialprocesses there (not because of the public of theNorth East, I hasten to add), the ability of, say,Durham County Council to influence the chemicalindustry in its area will be limited, but the ability ofsectoral agreements and carbon markets to influencethe chemical industry will be significant. So I thinkit is a question of looking at the whole picture. Webelieve that by having the regime and theperformance indicators that we have—and we sawthem as extremely important, and if I can reassurethe Committee, at the time of the machinery ofgovernment changes last summer for the newministerial team this was at the top of the in-tray, topersuade colleagues in other departments that theseindicators should be there. We believe that thatregime will itself provide momentum, but whether ornot it provides the guarantee is an open-endedquestion. The statutory framework, of course, willforce the government of the day to address thatquestion, but I think it is part of a momentum.

Q135 Dr Turner: Whatever detailed mechanisms orrelationships may emerge in this process, one thingis for certain: making it work successfully is going todepend upon some robust data. What is your feelingabout the processes for data collection andcoordination that we have at the moment onmeasuring carbon reductions, carbon budgets,whatever?Mr Woolas: I think the Government recognises theimportance of the issue. I think there is a hugeinternational importance to that issue. It is core, asyou will know, Chairman, to the internationaldiscussions and negotiation. There is a recognitionthat the UK has a competitive advantage by beingthe world leaders in auditing this area. There is anexpertise in the private sector, I believe, in thiscountry which I genuinely believe is the best, and Ithink that is regarded as so around the world, but tobe very frank with you I think we are in early daysand I think getting the auditing (as I call it) right isabsolutely crucial, and of course you have got tocompare apples with apples. It is no good, from thepoint of view of the atmosphere, getting themeasurements wrong or being inconsistent inmethodologies. I think the other point, Chairman,

which I know you are concerned about is to ensurethis is the case from the point of view of carbonmarkets as well, because carbon markets will notwork if they are not scientifically based andconsistent. You cannot politically fix a carbonmarket. It ceases to be such if you do that. So it is oneof the issues I worry most about, and the Secretaryof State has told me to worry about it, but I think weare doing just about what we should be doing, Ithink.Mr Hughes: Perhaps I could just answer that? Wehave obviously got the National Inventory, whichcollects the data for the UK, and that is theinformation we need to provide to the UNFCCC toproceed for our reporting purposes under Kyoto.The information that we collect breaks down inquite some detail and allows us to get informationwhich we can then use through some furtheranalysis—and we have done that over the last year—to look at what emissions can be at a local level.Now, that information is being developed and Ithink the latest information we have got is in relationto 2005, but each consecutive year that informationbecomes more robust and that information will beavailable for both baseline purposes for localauthorities and for them to be able to measure theirperformance as time goes on. This is something onwhich we have done a lot of work over the last yearin terms of trying to get that information together,but it should improve rapidly over the next year ortwo.Mr Wright: I am slightly more optimistic than Philin this respect. All the evidence that is coming backto me in terms of the discussions which are going onwith regard to Local Area Agreements between localareas, councils, LSPs and government oYce,certainly with regard to NI186 (which is the percapita CO2 reductions in an area), is that there isquite robust scientifically-based evidence withregard to this which has been challenged and beentested. Now, this is a long-term perspective. It willnot be able to be reviewed for 18 months to twoyears, but I am confident that that evidence is beingput in there. Andrew, hopefully you are going toback me up in regard to that.Mr Campbell: Absolutely. As both Ministers havesaid, this is not about central government imposingtargets on local areas. The evidence is there, the 2005baseline, but they key is to use that evidence bylocality to have the negotiation about what the rightlevel of target might be for a particular LAA over thenext three year period. Just one addition to what wassaid earlier is that there will be some areas whichprobably do not include 186, or one of the otherindicators, in their LAA, but information about howthey are doing will still be collected annually, whichwill feed into the Comprehensive Area Assessments.So some of the gains will come from outside thoseareas which include it as a target in their LAA, butwe would still expect them to take this agendaseriously and make improvements.

Q136 Dr Turner: Obviously the actual relationshipbetween local and central government is going to beabsolutely crucial in achieving success here. How do



you rate that relationship now? Is there goodcommunication between local government andnational government? Does national governmentlisten to the concerns of councils, and vice versa?Just what is the dialogue?Mr Woolas: I think it is a very interesting question.I think the Local Government Association hasproved to be a very valuable and now a matureorganisation. It is some eleven years since it started.At an institutional level, an oYcer level, oYcial level,policy development level, there is a very goodrelationship, and that is not just with DCLG, that iswith the main Whitehall departments. I think SandyBruce-Lockhart and the former Deputy PrimeMinister gave political leadership to that throughthe central local partnership which was establishedand has evolved. I think there is a better relationshipnow than there has been probably for 30 years, Iwould say, and credit to all political parties who areinvolved in that. Of course, the financial decisionsstill rankle, and I am sure Iain grapples with thoseevery day. If you had said to me a year and a halfago, would we get the Local Area Agreement inplace in time, I was sceptical, and I told the otherselect committee that at the time. I think localauthorities for their part took the attitude of this newagenda, “We’ll believe it when we see it,” and also,“It’s all very well for DCLG to say it, but what doesthe rest of Whitehall say?” I think if you were to askthe leadership they would say that the relationshipwas good. It is obviously a political relationship aswell, but on this area I think it is very strong. Thereis a consensus, I think.

Q137 Dr Turner: So is it fair to say that what wasseen as a somewhat disdainful attitude in the past ofcentral government towards local government hasmatured into something much more responsive, anddo you help it along with staV exchanges, civilservants exchanging with counterparts in localgovernment so that good practice gets disseminatedat both levels?Mr Woolas: I think the New Burdens policy hasworked. There was a lot of scepticism that thatwould be real, but I think it has become a disciplinewithin local government and I think local authoritiesrecognise that. Of course, there are arguments aboutwhat the amounts are. Yes, there is a lot of exchangeacross local authorities—not as much as I would liketo see—a lot of exchanges with the LocalGovernment Association, and also a deliberatepolicy of recruitment across local authority andcentral government so that you see careerdevelopment for oYcials in that way. Not in the waythat central government is the senior partners andlocal government is the junior partner, but one cansee a career development in the diVerent disciplinesand professions so that it is seen as public servicerather than local government and centralgovernment. I think the cultural change is beingdriven by Local Area Agreements where, of course,many of the partners at local level are centralgovernment departments and agencies in their localoperations, and I think that is changing the culture.

Mr Wright: May I speak with several hats on frommy former lives? I was a borough councillor, I was achair of a Local Strategic Partnership, and now I ama minister in Communities and Local Government.I think the point which has been made aboutmaturity is a valid one. Certainly in the five yearsthat I have been involved you can plot it. Thematurity, the feeling that central and localgovernment have a grown up relationship seems tobe very much progressing. I do, frankly, getfrustrated sometimes with councils. Everythinggood that happens is down to a local initiative andeverything bad that happens is because of centralgovernment, and I think we do need a greaterrealisation of what really is accurate there. But in themain, I think there is a much greater flow ofunderstanding. The Permanent Secretary of myDepartment is from local government and I thinkthat helps in terms of cultural expectations ofcertainly my Department. But I do think Phil isabsolutely right, there has been a greater maturitythere, and LAAs have really helped.Dr Turner: Thank you.

Q138 Joan Walley: I would be very interested to seethe evidence of how that is actually working inrelation to my own constituency.Mr Woolas: Yes. Can we list the exceptions,Chairman?

Q139 Joan Walley: I have to say it is somethingwhich I have been pushing for, but I would be veryinterested to see just what the evidence is on theground. Can I just ask about funding, because I amvery aware that, for example, in terms of Defra’sown budget—I was at a Waterways annual meetingover the weekend and one of the things theymentioned was the loss of the budget which Defrahad had which had been earmarked elsewhere,leaving a lesser amount for the EnvironmentAgency. So there are always other demands onmoney which has been earmarked. But the point Ireally want to ask each of you now is, how confidentare you that there are suYcient funds available at thelocal, regional and devolved level of government forthe mitigation and the adaptation which is needed?How can you know what money there is, because ifyou look at the funds which are just available forlocal authorities it is not that great an amount ofmoney?Mr Woolas: The approach we take on that is that ofcourse we would point out that overall thesettlement is inflation plus in the area, but I thinkthere are two policy points to examine. The first isthat the less ring-fencing there is, the more flexibilitythere is at local level, the greater the devolution, themore the paradox which the Chairman started us oVwith in his question become pertinent. So again thatis a matter of trust. I think the second point is—andthis takes us to the New Burdens policy, absolutelyto the heart of this, because the economics of this arethat in the long run it is cheaper to mitigate than itis not to. That is not to say that I am going to ask forthe money back from the councils, but it is animportant point. We have to identify where the



humps are, where the investment is needed. Is it inwaste collection infrastructure, for example? Howdoes it relate to the landfill tax? How does it relate tothe point you have made about PFIs? It is veryimportant. So, is there enough money? There isnever enough money. Is the policy the best it can bewithin the context of the extra money there isavailable? I hope so. The Environment Agency issubject to the Gershon eYciencies, just as the rest ofus are. Their capital budgets, of course, havesignificantly increased. The revenue budgets havebeen flat cash, I think. If it is not, I will correctmyself, Chairman. So I think those are the policyframeworks that we see it in.Mr Wright: I would agree with what Phil says. Ithink if you pull everything together with regard tothings like Warm Front, Carbon Trust funding, andthings like that, which do have a real impact uponenergy eYciency and means to mitigate climatechange. I think we are in the region of about a billionand a half pounds a year, which is an enormousamount of money. I think the challenge we have got,because I do not think we are transparent enough inthat and maybe we do need to be more open andclearer in terms of how that is directly aVectingclimate change, mitigation and adaptation—and Ican come on to, Chairman, my pet subject, which ishousing, and I know, Mrs Walley, you are interestedin housing—but I do think there are unprecedentedsums of money available to the Homes andCommunities Agency in regard to housing in orderto help regeneration infrastructure. I do think thereis a point in terms of the money that is being spent.I would not have thought that the man or woman inthe street, even if they are informed, would bethinking that we are spending a billion and a halfpounds each year on things to try and adapt andmitigate against climate change and I think we needto be clear about where this money comes from andhow we communicate that.

Q140 Joan Walley: Can I just press you a little bitfurther on that because you mentioned the WarmFront scheme? I am sure the Minister for Defra willperhaps want to come in on this, but I think one ofthe issues which has been flagged up is the fact thatthis Warm Front scheme was set up in relation to theFuel Poverty scheme, it was not set up as ideallythere to be dealing with these climate change issues.Therefore, the criteria which comes out from Defra,which is picked up as part of a local authorityproposal to deal with these issues, to some extent isstill constrained by a set of criteria which was finewhen it was just simply a fuel poverty programmebut it needs to be looked at in the wider picture. Soit is how there are these checks and balances all thetime to make sure that where you say there is moneyavailable and it is already being allocated, it can besuYciently flexible to be able to be broadened out toinclude these climate change aspects that we need tobe mainstreamed, which is what local authorities arenow doing.Mr Woolas: Except that it is the house, not theperson, which is retro-fitted. The criteria foreligibility for Warm Front is, of course, based on the

individual, the householder, but it is the house thatbenefits. So whilst it is primarily a fuel povertymeasure, it is secondarily, and importantly, a fueleYciency measure which is sustainable because it isthe house which is refitted. We are currently,following representations from the House, lookingat how from an energy eYciency point of view, thescheme can better dovetail with other schemes. Interms of the major policy lever which we have, Iwould point the Committee to the CarbonEmissions Reduction Target, which started on 1st

April, the £1.5 billion scheme through energycompanies, which is primarily an energy eYciencymeasure. But if I could just make the other point,Chairman, which is that the major driver of fuelpoverty determination is the price of fuel, and I amkeen to point out that I do not want my strategies tobe following in the wake of increased fuel prices. Thebest way of reducing fuel poverty is to decrease theprice of fuel, not to use more taxpayers’ money toretro-fit houses, so we are trying to do both,Chairman.Mr Wright: If I may say, Chairman, on a similartheme to the Warm Front, the Decent HomesStandard, which I think we should be very proud ofas a government, the replacement of windows,boilers, and such like, was ostensibly about trying toaddress the real under-investment in social housingrather than adapting to climate change, but with newand more eYcient boilers, with more eYcientwindows which can keep the heat in, that has a hugeimpact upon climate change and CO2 emissions.How we actually measure that in relation to ascheme which ostensibly is not regarding that is achallenge.Colin Challen: I think I might have the Member forTelford sat on my shoulder when I am asking thisquestion, but have either of your departments doneany work on modelling, at what point it is possiblethat the cost of adaptation might overwhelm theeVorts of local authorities to deal with mitigation?One can imagine a situation where an authority,perhaps Hull, overwhelmed with floods may becompletely deflected then only to look at adaptationand any eVort on mitigation would be electorallyimpossible.Chairman: We will have to suspend, I think, forfifteen minutes and resume at a quarter past four.The Committee adjourned from 4.01 pm to 4.29 pmfor divisions in the House.

Q141 Chairman: We are a quorum. There was aquestion which has been asked, but the questionerhas gone. Do you want to answer in Mr Challen’sabsence?Mr Woolas: Thank you, Chairman. For the record,the question was, just to remind the Committee,what happens when adaptation costs more and thereis not enough for mitigation? The answer is, a verygood question! The answer to that is, I do not know,or rather it is not known at this point in time. Thereare two serious policy measures which we have toaddress the issue. The first is the proposal to publishan adaptation policy framework, which will followfrom the deliberation of the Climate Change Bill but



not be statutorily part of that, and that will set outthe overall vision for the United Kingdom onadaptation. The Bill itself, of course, also requires, ifParliament approves it, the Government to report toParliament on an annual basis.Mr Hughes: At least every five years on progressmade regarding adaptation.Mr Woolas: In the budgets, that is right. The secondpoint is that we have the Climate ImpactsProgramme, Chairman, which I am going to askJames to say a bit more about, which is doing thescience on this area.Mr Hughes: As you know, the UK Climate ImpactsProgramme did a lot of very good work in terms oflooking at what climate impacts might be. It is doinga lot of work at the moment with the intention ofpublishing some updated scenarios later on thisyear. The last set was done in 2002 and were basedon emissions levels and this new set will be too, butthey will also take account of the probability ofthings happening at diVerent temperatures andtherefore it will give a better ability to assess risk. Itwill be looking at what the impacts of climate changemight be down to a 25 kilometre square area, so itwill be fairly detailed. That information will becoming out in the second half of this year. As theMinister has mentioned, we have got the adaptationpolicy framework coming out. We have also got thisrequirement in the bill for the Government to reportto Parliament on a risk assessment, and that riskassessment will need to consider the costs andbenefits associated with the UK adapting to climatechange. Again, subject to parliamentary approval ofthe Climate Change Bill, another of the things itcontains is the requirement of the Government toproduce a programme for how it is going to addressthose risks. So all of that will be a commitment onGovernment once the bill becomes statute.

Q142 Mr Caton: One of the Local GovernmentAssociation’s and Climate Change Commission’srecommendations was consideration of thestatutory underpinning of local government actionon climate change. Should there be a statutory dutyon local authorities, and indeed RegionalDevelopment Agencies and other public bodies, totackle climate change?Mr Woolas: That is really one for me, I think, is itnot? We believe that the combination of theperformance regime and the statutory duties tocooperate on partners will address the objective ofthe proposal that there should be a statutory duty ina better and more comprehensive and meaningfulway. The taking of responsibility and the powers tomake those responsibilities really does address that,but I caveat my answer by, again, pointing out (as weboth have done) the dilemma between devolutionand centralisation. So obviously that is somethingwhich has been given huge consideration and that isthe policy which has resulted.Mr Wright: Just to add to that, I do reiterate thepoint I made to the Committee earlier, Chairman,about clause 147 of the Planning Bill, which sets outthat local planning authorities must include in theirdevelopment plan documents taken as whole

policies designed to secure the development and useof land in their area and that those policiescontribute to mitigating and adapting to climatechange. So although I recognise the importance ofhaving flexibility with regard to the planning policystatements, there is going through Parliament at themoment the proposed locking on the statute bookwhere local planning authorities do play a key rolethere.

Q143 Mr Caton: Are councils using their existingpowers as fully as they can to tackle climate change?Have you identified any areas where new powersshould be introduced, or even existing powersstrengthened?Mr Woolas: Just one point. I think I am right insaying the LGA Commission on the statutory pointgave a two year gap and said councils should begiven the chance to do it and then we should look atit again. I think the answer to the question is that inEngland there are around 400 local authorities, 150Local Area Agreements, and there are some greatexamples and some poor ones. I think where morecould very clearly be done would be in energyeYciency. I think that is the big gain that we arelooking for in the new regime.Mr Wright: When Local Area Agreements are usedproperly, I think there is transparency and I thinkthere should be a dialogue between the partners,particularly the local authority, and the public toflush this sort of thing out. Phil and I were talkingearlier on about naming and shaming localauthorities which maybe do not have climate changewithin their Local Area Agreements. I have to saythat in terms of the number of Local AreaAgreements and local areas which do not have thisas a priority it is comparatively few. Of the 150 or soat the moment, given the process of negotiation thatis going on between the local areas and GovernmentOYces, we are only talking at the moment of roundabout nine which have not had some sort of climatechange indicator as something of a priority. So inthat respect I think it is largely positive. Whether wego out and name and shame them is something toconsider.

Q144 Mr Caton: Recognising that variation andtaking on board what Phil Woolas has said aboutthe Commission talking about a two year timeframe,is the Government mindful to look again after thatsort of period of time to see whether statutory dutiesdo need to be placed on local authorities?Mr Woolas: The Government is mindful because ofthe obligation which we hope the Climate ChangeBill will place upon us, and that will apply across theboard. If we are not able to show that the trajectorieson the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are inline with our requirements and our internationalobligations, then we would have to re-examine thepolicy. I think I am right in saying that in this areaof sustainability and climate change there are moreBeacon councils than in any of the other categories,which is quite encouraging.Mr Caton: Thank you.



Q145 Martin Horwood: A few councils have come upwith some really quite imaginative financialincentives to householders to do things like energyeYciency or renewable energy. We have got one witha loan fund which lends people capital to invest inrenewables and then reclaims that money only whenthe property is sold. Why are not more of these kindsof financial incentives happening? What are thebarriers to these being more common?Mr Wright: What I would say is that we are trying toencourage this as much as possible. Beacon councils,which Phil has just mentioned, are a good exampleof trying to disseminate this good practice. We comeback time and time again, though, Chairman, tolocally devolved ideas and cultures and how that canbe best applied to particular local circumstances.The point you made, Mr Horwood, about therevolving fund, that is something we have appliedcentrally to the Salix financing fund, which is actingas a multiplier to provide energy eYciency measures,and energy savings can then be recycled back. I amkeen to disseminate that and Beacon councils areaware that you can do that, but I would be keen tohear more examples as well.

Q146 Martin Horwood: I must admit, until I wasbriefed for this meeting I was not aware that thatkind of scheme was possible actually. Are youconfident that local authorities actually know thatthey can do things like this?Mr Woolas: No.

Q147 Martin Horwood: So is that not your fault?Mr Woolas: Yes, it is. It is our responsibility. I thinkwe live in a country—and this is the Government’sview—which is over-centralised, that we increase theperformance regime on a centralised basis andincrease the finances in order to improve the qualityof performance of local government, and that hasworked. We do not see the new regime as a U-turn,we see it as a natural development. The number ofcouncils we have measured as improving orsuccessful has increased dramatically over thecourse of eight years, and we are now in a newregime. Characteristic of that new regime is therequirement for a management and leadershipculture which says, “We can do things,” rather than,“Government won’t let us do things,” as theSecretary of State said at the time of the GovernmentWhite Paper. So it is a question of changing culture.

Q148 Martin Horwood: But unless someone such asthe Department has told them that these kinds ofthings are actually possible, it is sometimes diYcultfor people to imagine what they have to do to getsomewhere.Mr Woolas: Well, we are putting some money on thetable, Chairman.

Q149 Martin Horwood: Could I just ask one specificquestion about financial incentives? The obviousvehicle for it at local government level is council taxand doing incentives or discounts on council tax for

people who do the right thing or invest. Is thatlegally possible? Are there any legal or technicalbarriers to using council tax in that way?Mr Wright: That is happening already. Kirklees, Ithink I am right in thinking, is a local authority interms of having council tax incentives.Mr Woolas: Kirklees operates a revolving loan fundfor environmental improvements actually.Mr Wright: To allow and to facilitate localauthorities to do things on the ground, it is perfectlyreasonable. I think there is a cultural challenge, asPhil has just mentioned, in terms of saying, “Youcan do this,” rather than, “Government won’t letus.” It is turning around quite substantial culturalbarriers there, I think. Reiterating one of the themeswe have had already today, that more maturerelationship between central and local government ishelping, but I think we have to be mindful of thosecultural barriers which need to be knocked down.

Q150 Martin Horwood: Can I put to you anotherexample, which may be again not so much aboutcultural barriers but simply about people notknowing what is out there and what powers theyactually have and what they can do? The LocalGovernment Act in 2000 introduced the new powerfor local authorities to promote “the environmental,economic and social well-being” of theircommunities. Presumably, they could be using theenvironmental section of that power to promoteenergy eYciency. Do you think many of them aredoing so?Mr Woolas: Not enough, Chairman. I think thepower of well-being was heralded by localauthorities, by senior oYcers and by leaders, but I donot believe that has filtered down enough and I thinkas Members of Parliament when we are addressedwith the answer, “We are not allowed to do that,”the answer is, “The 2000 Act allows you, using thepower of well-being for your area, to do everythingthe law prescribes other than what the law prescribesyou cannot do.”

Q151 Martin Horwood: So if enabling powers,communication, best practice examples and thingslike this are not really filtering through, does this notbring us back to this point about statutoryunderpinning, that actually maybe we needstatutory duties and that that is the way you willreally achieve a step change in local governmentperformance?Mr Woolas: Chairman, we would see that as afailure.

Q152 Martin Horwood: Maybe we are failing them,are we not?Mr Woolas: You could describe it in that way. Ithink local government has to step up to the mark. Ithink it is capable of doing that. Interestingly, I thinkI am right in saying that the LGA Climate ChangeCommission said that councils should have twoyears but that the statutory duty should be imposedupon individual councils which did not step up to themark. I think I am right in saying that. Yes, I am. Iam getting a nod.



Q153 Martin Horwood: So it would be appliedselectively?Mr Woolas: Yes, but that is coming from the LocalGovernment Association, so they clearly think it is apossibility.

Q154 Martin Horwood: Would you support thatkind of power to enforce poor performers to step up?Mr Wright: We are getting, Chairman, to the heartof the issue, which is should it be locally determinedor should it be dictated in terms of centralgovernment diktat? It has to be said that I personallybelieve in terms of changing around culture ifsomebody is persuaded of the merits as opposed tobeing told and dictated to, “You have to do this,” Ithink there is more ownership, more buy-in andmore commitment. That is why I come back to thefact that the Local Government PerformanceFramework, I think, is appropriate because thatlevel of discussion and negotiation between centralgovernment via Government OYces and the localareas I think really helps embed that commitment,and I think we are seeing it on the ground. It is earlydays, I grant you that, Chairman, but I do think thatis important. That is persuading people rather thandictating through quite blunt statutory instruments.

Q155 Martin Horwood: This is going to becomequite critical when we have national carbon budgets,is it not?Mr Woolas: Yes, it is, very much so.Mr Hughes: Could I just make one or twocomments? In terms of the desire to try and makesure that councils appreciate what might beavailable, certainly from examples from othercouncils (i.e. in terms of sharing best practice), justto mention a few things, most of which havehappened very recently but which I hope will help toensure that best practice to be shared. One is thattowards the end of last year the Governmentpublished an Energy Measures Report, whichprovides advice to local authorities on what they cando. We have also got the Best Practice programme,which the Minister mentioned, which was launchedvery recently, and again that is going to be providinginformation not just on best practice but alsoassisting with training and on mentoring. Also, theNottingham Declaration Partnership are updatingtheir website and I think they are looking to launchthat in June this year. That is also a source ofinformation for local authorities in order to find outwhat is happening elsewhere, and obviously we havenow just had round ten of the Beacon CouncilScheme. We have got climate change Beaconcouncils now, and again there are examples there ofbest practice in terms of what is happening withintheir local areas as well. So there are lots of thingswhich have been happening very recently or areabout to happen.Mr Wright: Again, Chairman, following up on that,I think Mr Horwood mentioned the well-beingpower for local authorities. My department hasfunded an independent valuation of the take-up ofthat well-being power, which has been on the StatueBook for five, six, seven years, something like that,

and has looked closely at a series of case studieswhere this well-being power has been used andapplied eVectively, and publication guidance withregard to that evaluation will be published shortly.

Q156 Martin Horwood: So can you tell us now howmany have taken it up?Mr Wright: No, I cannot.

Q157 Mr Chaytor: Minister, you started oV sayingthat devolution was at the heart of this policy, butthen you stepped back a little bit and said that for thelast few years government has been highlycentralised in order to drive up the policy andperformance of local government. Are you sayingthat the reason why we are only now recognising therole of local and regional government in the deliveryof climate change policy is the inadequacy of localand regional government over the last ten years? Areyou saying there was no capacity to deliver untilnow?Mr Woolas: That question is directed at me,Chairman, so I will answer it. The level of flexibilityin a local authority’s revenue finances has beenextremely limited for many years. It is not a partisanpoint—well, it is in part—but it was very tight.Therefore, for authorities to make changes, to re-prioritise, was very diYcult because they could onlyreally allow on council tax increases (previously rateincreases). As resources increased, as revenuebudgets went up, it gave them more flexibility, butagainst a background of the drive to improve theywere focused, I think, on the areas that the CPAfocused them on. I think the second point is that theclimate change issue, as we all know, has risen up thepolitical agenda most in recent years, not least in thelast twelve months and I think local authorities arecatching up (as the rest of us are) with that. Ofcourse, the financial framework, the incentive, otherthan notably in landfill sites, has not really been thedriver which I think the future policy measures wehave described today will be.

Q158 Mr Chaytor: But it is now ten years since theGovernment signed up to a target-based policy bysigning the Kyoto Protocol and for a number ofyears we have had increasing numbers of localauthorities signing this Nottingham declaration,which is a clear indication that they saw a role forlocal authorities and they wanted to do more. So myquestion is, why has it taken so long for Governmentto adjust the system and provide the incentives forlocal authorities to do more?Mr Woolas: First of all, the United Kingdom is ontarget to meet its Kyoto commitments. Thegreenhouse gas emissions are reducing. We shouldnot confuse—and I am not saying the question does,Mr Chaytor, but we should never confuse CO2 andgreenhouse gas emissions. We are on target, so mycase is that it is working. Secondly, because it took awhile for the issue to move from the CabinetMember or chairs of environment committees’ in-trays to the lead Member on finance, the chief



executive and leaders’ in-trays, I think we havepassed the tipping point now, for the reasons wehave discussed.

Q159 Mr Chaytor: Could I put a question about thecapacity of local government? I am just interested, asa digression, to read the Hartlepool glossy literaturefrom your exhibition there and it speaks about thealluring restaurants, the chic shopping and theexhilarating water sports.Mr Wright: Absolutely!

Q160 Mr Chaytor: It does not mention climatechange and environment, but my question is, whatis the capacity in Hartlepool Council, for example,Minister, to deliver on the new requirements you areplacing on them? Is there the capacity in terms of thetechnical oYcers with the right level of skills? WillHartlepool be able to deliver an enhanced energyeYciency scheme? Will they be able to documenttheir own greenhouse gas emissions, let alone that ofother agencies and businesses within Hartlepool?Mr Wright: I think, Chairman, Hartlepool is a veryinteresting case study, not only because it is thecentre of the universe and has a real renaissance interms of food, as you can see from my expandingwaistline!Mr Woolas: Guacamole!Mr Wright: I think you will find it is guacamole!Hartlepool is the second smallest unitary authorityin the country and cannot deliver on its own. I wouldsuggest—and this happened whilst I was a memberof the local authority—I am not suggesting I was thedriving force or anything, but I was the CabinetMember responsible for performance management,which included the estates of the local authority, andwe had in 2003/2004, targets with regard to climatechange and greenhouse gas emissions on the estatesof the local authority. There is very much acommitment both from oYcers and members whohave been following through for the last five yearswith regard to this, but there is also a recognitionthat Hartlepool cannot perform on its own. So Iwould bring in a further important point, if I may,Chairman, about multi-area agreements.Hartlepool is part of the Tees Valley and Tees Valleyunlimited, which includes Middlesbrough, Stocktonand others, particularly Middlesbrough are veryfocused upon how we can work together to try andmitigate and adapt to climate change. So I would saythat Hartlepool is a very good case study about thecommitment, the level. The cultural key points arethere at both member and oYcer level, but also arecognition that we need to work in a sub-regionaland regional way. I think actually in terms of sub-regional government arrangements Hartlepoolstands firm and stands alone after Cleveland andafter going unitary in 1996. But it also recognises, tobe fair, that there are some things which need to bedone in partnership and I think that is where TeesValley works incredibly well.

Q161 Mr Chaytor: We have got a mismatch really,and this is the point I want to tease out, because youare giving the responsibility to individual local

authorities to deliver on the performance indicators185, 186 and 188, but you are acknowledging thatsome of the local authorities are actually too smallor will not have the professional capacity to deliver.I just want to see if you recognise that as a problem.Mr Woolas: Can I have a stab at this as well, please,Chairman? If you break down where the emissionscome from and then try to correlate that with thecapacity of local authorities—and we now have, ofcourse, regional figures and local figures—twothings are very pertinent. The first is that an area’semissions are correlated to an industrial set-up. Imentioned before that the North East is the regionin this country which has the highest per capitaemissions and that is because of the industrialprocesses which go on in that part of the world.Mr Wright: And I would assume that Tees Valley ispart of that team.Mr Woolas: The Tees Valley is very much part ofthat. I would point out for the benefit of mycolleague Iain that the domestic per capita emissionsof his area are the best in the country. They are thecleanest people. The opposite is the case in the non-London South East.Mr Wright: We are a clean people!Mr Woolas: The less industrial the area is, the lessthe emissions, but in the non-London South East, inthe government oYce South East area per capitaemissions for domestic use are the highest in thecountry because the better oV you are, the higheryour footprint is. So the strategies and capacities oflocal authorities have to recognise that diVerence, sonon-car transport and road, increased powersthrough local transport plans, devolution toregional transport plans, passenger transportauthorities, being part of multi-area agreements,getting more power. Forty-two per cent of emissionsare domestic and cars. What powers have localauthorities got, what capacity have they got outsideof the social housing—and there is an open questionthere as well—there is a mismatch there that we areconscious of. On energy, the shift in policy todecentralisation, combined heat and power, greaterrenewables and micro, again there is, we believe,within the local government and public sector familyto help individual local authorities to deliver, but ofcourse the major energy questions relate to nationalpolicies, national planning policies and nationalenergy policies. Industrial symbiosis changes intoindustrial processes that will impact upon areas suchas Tees Valley. Capacity within local authorities isnot significant enough, frankly, to aVect those areas,so partnership approaches at a regional and sub-regional level with the private sector become all-important. So the way in which I would answer thevery important question you have asked is todetermine it by sector relating to emissions and seewhat the capacity is to address that. The answer, Ithink, is therefore patchy.

Q162 Mr Chaytor: Just one little supplementary.You describe it as “patchy”. In terms of the capacityto deliver, I want to put to you whether you think itis too fragmented because local authorities have arole, individual companies have a role, central



government applies the framework and the rhetoric,the Carbon Trust as the role with regard to largebusinesses, the Energy Saving Trust in regard tosmaller businesses, other public sector agencies andhouseholds. We have got an organisation whichprovides finance on a match basis with localauthorities. Is there not a powerful argument for asingle, central government agency to coordinate allthis and drive it through, and is not the heart of theproblem that within Government itselfresponsibility is fragmented between the DCLG,Defra and the Treasury? Therefore, the final part ofthe question is, should we not really be having adepartment of energy and climate change to pull allthis together and drive it through?Mr Woolas: And the Department for Transport,again in terms of emissions. The Government’spolicy is that it is better to mainstream it than torestructure to try and solve the problem.Mr Wright: I can understand the attractiveness ofthe argument, but I would say that sustainabilityand the ability to mitigate and adapt to climatechange should be at the heart of what we do. It isfollowing on from what Phil said there aboutmainstreaming, so transport, do we not have aDepartment for Transport, do we not have aDepartment for Communities and LocalGovernment, because emissions arising fromtransport is important and emissions arising fromboth domestic and non-domestic dwellings accountfor something like half of all carbon emissions? Dowe not have a CLG in that respect? I have just takenthrough the Housing and Regeneration Bill,something that I am very proud of, but that is thecreation of the Homes and Communities Agency,which will be a national agency charged with helpingfacilitate the building of homes and regeneratinginfrastructure and communities in England. It willhave the Academy for Sustainable Communities aspart of that, which will help address the skillsshortage which I think is in Mr Chaytor’s question,Chairman. But I still maintain that it should beabout mainstreaming. Sustainable development andthinking about climate change should be at the heartof what we do, regardless of how the machinery ofgovernment is worked.

Q163 Chairman: Would it be fair to say that thepriority the Government attaches to economicdevelopment makes really putting enough priorityon climate change almost impossible for local andregional and devolved government?Mr Woolas: No, I do not believe that is the case. Ithink the response to the Sub-National Review andthe regional priorities built into the PSA for regionaleconomic achievement does include climate change.Chairman, I think the Committee’s views on this willbe very helpful. Part of the culture change is thepenny dropping of Nick Stern’s report. Nick Stern’sreport changes the way in which people look at it,and my fear is that the public sector leadership andmanagement intellectually gets it but does nottranslate that into decision-making, and I thinkwhen that penny drops from the Stern report that isthe answer to the question. HMT get the economic

point on adaptation and mitigation more, in myview, than chancellors and treasuries in othercountries. So I am optimistic on that point, but Ithink it does need a push.Mr Wright: I see this as a huge opportunity,Chairman, for British industry. I think we can leadthe world and take over from the likes of Germanyin having firms, particularly in terms of buildingfirms and the construction industry making sure thatwe adapt innovative products which can help tomitigate and adapt to climate change which we canthen subsequently export to the rest of the world. Ithink this is a massive opportunity for Britishindustry, in which we can lead the world.

Q164 Chairman: Are you afraid that having threespecific climate change targets may divert attentionaway from the need to get climate change consideredin the delivery against all targets for localgovernment?Mr Woolas: Yes. I think we have to try and reachagreement at a UN level on a long-term goal. Wehave to build in interim targets within that becausethe nature of climate change is that parts per millionin the atmosphere of carbon are cumulative with a30 to 40 year lag for diminishing, so you have to havea trajectory for scientific reasons. You have to havea trajectory with mid-term targets for political andeconomic reasons to make it right, and one of theconcerns over the targets (which we support) is,however, the knowledge that those becomemaximums not minimums and divert you from otherareas, which of course is the criticism of any target.But you have to have for industry and for sectorssuch as housing, which Iain has mentioned, andothers a framework in terms of trajectories whichyou work towards. I think the other point,Chairman, is the relationship between those targetsand the carbon market. I think that is absolutelycrucial, because those targets will inform the carbonmarket and aVect the price of carbon, and that initself will help, I think, to meet the point you make,which I think is a crucial point and is being debated.

Q165 Chairman: Yes. What I was really trying to getto were the indicators for local government. Youhave got specific indicators, these three indicators.Are you nervous that that may mean that the focusis explicitly on those rather than looking at how thewhole of local government activity aVects climatechange?Mr Woolas: No, I am not. I am optimistic because of185 and 186 together. I believe 186, the geographicalarea one, is one of the most empowering articles forlocal government that there has been for manydecades within the context of the internationalrecognition of climate change and the domesticpolicy statutory and financial changes which aregoing on. That will allow, say, a council in the NorthEast to work with ConocoPhillips, who have thelargest combined heat and power plant in Europe, tohave a strategy to do more, to the benefit of that areaand the UK economy, so I am very, very excited. I



hope we get 150 local authorities signed up to PI186and we will be watching DCLG’s statements veryclosely.

Q166 Chairman: We discussed this with you lastweek really, that the science on climate change isshowing that the problem is getting more urgent andbigger than we had previously understood and thatby itself may call into question, I think, what wouldotherwise be very sympathetic within your earlieranswers about not being too dictatorial to localgovernment and trying to reduce centralisationrather than increase it. This is particularly urgent,and may become an overriding urgent issue, so thatslightly more laidback approach, which instinctivelyI would be sympathetic to, may become lessappropriate in the case of climate change because ofthe urgency of it. Looking at the need for a stepchange in performance, do you think there is still arisk that councils may focus on other issues in theirLocal Area Agreement and do not particularly lookat the three climate change indicators?Mr Woolas: There is a risk, but I think thereassurance I can give in response to that flow ofthought is the budget, the carbon budgets, thecarbon reduction commitments. I have said beforethat it has come out of the in-tray of the environmentoYce and into the chief executive’s. The budgets willput it right at the heart of the Treasury’s in-tray, sofinancial decisions will follow, and I think that willchange things. Money talks!

Q167 Chairman: Given, as I say, the urgency of theissue, is there, however, a case for making climatechange a national priority? I know there are certainother areas of local government where there aresignals and incentives created. Do you think we aregetting to the point where a similar approach isneeded for climate change?Mr Woolas: No, I do not, on balance, because Ithink in the nature of things if you are devolving youhave to have an element of trust. You have to ensurethat the accountability for the public is as strong asit is possible to be, and I think the argument couldalways be put that there are other equally importantpriorities, children’s services being the obvious one.I think more importantly than that—and wedebated this at some length inside the Department,and it is a subjective view, of course, but you get thebest when you change the culture, do you not, whenyou get management, oYcers and leaders focused onthe bigger picture? What is the best way of doingthat, on balance, is the more flexible approach, butit is within the framework of the Climate Change Actand the carbon budgets and carbon reductioncommitments, and what I believe will be in the next

few words, touch wood, the international agreementto back that up. I think that will achieve what you,Chairman, are concerned about, but of course I havenot got a crystal ball.Mr Wright: I still reiterate the point I tried to makeearlier, Chairman, which is that with this locallydevolved agenda where Government is trying topersuade as opposed to dictate I think it has greaterlevels of ownership and commitment, and I thinkthat, backed up with the science—the floods in thesummer, when I travelled around speaking to localauthorities, I think it is very clear that people areseeing the same things as us in terms of centralgovernment and local government in respect of thescience and it is aVecting them on the ground. Thatis helping to turn around the cultural things, becausethis is not an academic exercise for them. They arehaving to deal with the consequences of climatechange on the ground. As Phil has said, that backedup with this locally devolved agenda, backed up withmoney and budgets, really will help change theculture in local authorities.

Q168 Martin Horwood: Can I just ask you abouthomelessness, where you have got what is a veryimportant moral duty, a very important specific dutyfor some of the population locally, but it does notactually threaten the future of human civilisation? Interms of climate change, could we not have statutoryduties laid upon local authorities in the same waythat statutory duties are laid upon them in terms ofhomelessness, which I think has actually helped tochange the culture in the way you describe, at a locallevel, where the statutory duties have been part ofthat process of change? It is a balance, is it not?Mr Wright: It is a balance, but in terms ofhomelessness the way we have pushed the policyreiterates and reinforces in my own mind that it isbeing done by having that locally devolved agenda.Local authorities in conjunction with the voluntarysector have pushed the real changes in homelessness,backed up, I would have to say, by the biggest evercash injection into homelessness services, but I donot want to make the narrow partisan point. Maybethat combination or giving local authorities theconfidence to deal with things on the ground in theirown areas, backed up with partnership andvoluntary sector organisations, and helped withcentral government funding, has been the wayforward in which we have been able to reducehomelessness by 73% over the last decade.Chairman: Thank you for your time. I think we arejust about to run out of a quorum here. I think thetwo divisions slightly depleted our stamina.Anyhow, we are grateful to you for coming in and Ihope we can produce some helpfulrecommendations for you when we write the report.

Ev 88 Environmental Audit Committeee: Evidence

Written evidenceMemorandum submitted by the Nappy Alliance

Executive Summary

We welcome the important role that local authorities and regional government play in the fight againstclimate change. Many local authorities in the UK have introduced Reusable Nappy Schemes which havebeen instrumental in significantly reducing the amount of disposable nappies going to landfill and thusreducing the amount of methane produced. The Alliance therefore believes that local authorities should beassisted with the funding and administering of re-usable nappy initiatives and we welcome recent initiativessuch as the Real Nappy Campaign Limited and Real Nappies for London in doing so.

The Climate Change Bill will oVer unique opportunities for local authorities to promote waste reductionand we hope when the Government decides on which areas should pilot financial incentive schemes it willfavour those local authorities which seek to include extra financial incentives to those parents who decideto use reusable nappies.

Revised Waste Strategy

1. The Nappy Alliance welcomes the Environmental Audit Committee inquiry into climate change andlocal, regional and devolved government. There is no doubt that local authorities and regional governmenthave an important role to play in the battle against climate change, particularly in the context of wastereduction. Local authorities across the UK play a crucial role in providing various services and it is clearwithin their work there are great opportunities to reduce current levels of carbon emissions.

2. Waste is a major contribution to the UK Greenhouse emissions. Landfill currently accounts for 38%of all UK methane emissions, a greenhouse gas which is far more harmful in terms of climate change thancarbon dioxide. Therefore, if the government is serious about lowering carbon emissions and reducing thethreat of climate change, it is clear that the current levels of waste going to landfill must be addressed.

3. Nappy waste is the biggest identifiable waste stream in household waste and makes up 3–4% of allhousehold waste. With increasing levels of recycling of other waste streams, this percentage is likely toincrease even more. The Environment Agency has estimated that the decomposition timescale for some ofthe materials and chemicals currently used in disposables is more than 500 years.1 The paper-fluV andfaeces should take approximately 100 and 10 years respectively to degrade. It is clear that increasing theuptake of reusable nappies could considerably drive down the harmful methane emissions currently emittedin the UK.

4. The Alliance has previously welcomed the Government’s recognition of the waste problem and thepositive benefits for waste reduction that reusable nappy use brings. Defra’s funding of the Waste &Resources Action Programme (WRAP), which for three years funded the Real Nappy Campaign, is a primeexample of a successful initiative. The Campaign’s aim to encourage 155,000 households to use reusablenappies by March 2007 was an important step and this led to the diversion of “approximately 23,000 tonnesof biodegradable nappy waste from landfill in England”. However, despite the obvious benefits of reusablenappies on the reduction of household waste going to landfill in those local authorities which took part inthe pilot schemes, the Department decided to discontinue funding the Campaign.

5. Many local authorities across England already successfully operate a number of local reusable nappyschemes which seek to encourage the use of reusable nappies amongst households with young children. TheAlliance believes that local authorities should be assisted with the funding and administering of reusablenappy initiatives, which are constructive and sustainable with clear environmental benefits. It is vital thatlocal reusable nappy schemes continue to receive the much needed financial support from local authorities,particularly now that central funding through WRAP has dried up. In addition, in local areas where reusablenappy schemes are in place, councils should be encouraged and supported to eVectively promote theirexistence through adequate council recycling guides.

6. The Nappy Alliance is grateful to the Local Government Association for its eVorts to promote reusablenappies and real nappy schemes amongst its local authority members. In addition, the Real NappyCampaign Limited which will be operational from early 2008 onwards, will seek to promote the use ofreusable nappies and provide information, in partnership with WRAP, to young parents and localauthorities who are keen to reduce their contribution to landfill.

7. Earlier this year, the Women’s Environmental Network launched Real Nappies for London, aLondon-wide incentive scheme which seeks to help parents in choosing and trying cloth nappies. It providesa prime example of how local authorities have worked together to help young parents with the initialpurchase cost of reusable nappies through the introduction of a scheme whereby vouchers can be exchangedfor reusable nappies and accessories at listed retailers or for a trial period with a nappy laundry service.

1 Environment Agency, Life cycle Assessment of Disposable and Reusable Nappies in the UK, 2005.

Environmental Audit Committeee: Evidence Ev 89

8. The Nappy Alliance supports the Climate Change Bill and the ambitious legally binding target to cutcarbon emissions by 60% by 2050. The Alliance particularly welcomes the element of the Bill which seeksto introduce pilot schemes for financial incentives to be piloted in five local authorities aimed at improvingrecycling and waste reduction. This part of the Bill oVers a fantastic opportunity for local authorities tocome up with creative solutions for reducing waste. Building on the progress of previous work with WRAPthrough the Real Nappy Campaign, reusable nappies would be an ideal candidate for such schemes.

9. We welcome the Bill’s provisions (Schedule 5, Paragraph 2) which acknowledge that incentive schemesin the five pilot local authorities need to take into account the needs of certain disadvantaged groups.However, we are concerned about the proposals laid out in the Defra consultation on financial incentiveswhich preceded the Bill and which stated that these disadvantaged groups should include young parentsspecifically because of their dependency on disposable nappies. We believe this would eVectively encouragelocal authorities to give up on reducing the largest category of household waste, disposable nappies. Giventhe anticipated increase in the recycling rates of other waste categories within household waste, thepercentage of disposable nappies in the total household waste is likely to increase significantly.

10. Given the availability of reusable nappies as a viable and user-friendly alternative to disposablenappies, we are concerned that local authorities who do not include exemptions for young parents in theirbid to the Secretary of State to become one of the five pilot authorities will be excluded should they havedecided not to do so in their bid in a drive to reduce the dependency on disposable nappies locally.

11. There are many case-studies elsewhere in Europe which show that variable charging can lead to asustained decrease in the amount of household waste going to landfill. For example, a recent study inSchweinfurt, Germany, has shown that after the introduction of a form of variable charging, the amountof disposable nappies which ended up in landfill decreased by 33% as a result of parents switching to the useof reusable nappies.

Who We Are

The Nappy Alliance was established by independent providers of reusable nappies to act as the trade bodyfor the commercial market of reusable nappies, to promote their use amongst new parents and to addressthe ongoing issue of the 3 billion disposable nappies which go to landfill in the UK every year.

The Alliance promotes awareness of the key benefits of reusable nappies. Aside from environmentalbenefits, reusable nappies oVer consumers a choice, one which can be informed through benefits to the baby,cost eVectiveness and the wider environmental impacts. In addition, considerable financial savings can bemade, with disposables costing as much as three times that of reusable nappies, with an average saving of£500 per baby for home laundered nappies.

December 2007

Memorandum submitted by Scotland & Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research (SNIFFER)

SNIFFER identifies and manages research with the aim to increase knowledge to help protect ourenvironment and improve quality of life. We do this through an evidence based approach to gathering anddisseminating information.

The key components of what we provide are:

— research management and coordination;

— knowledge exchange; and

— horizon scanning.





4. To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland will set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanUK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030, fittogether with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions, and the impact of carbon reduction policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

Further resources need to be allocated to allow refinement and development of the disaggregated GHGemissions inventories. For example, in Scotland the “Scotland’s Share” approach has been taken toconsidering, measuring and projecting emissions. This approach diVers in some extent to the methodologybeing trialled in other areas of the UK such as Northern Ireland and the approach being explored in Wales.

Whilst the Devolved Administrations are liaising with Whitehall over monitoring and forecasting work,further opportunities for co-ordination could be explored by the additional input of UK governmentresources.


The Scottish Government’s National Adaptation Programme is in the early stages of development, withanticipation growing regarding the launch of a public consultation on the Scottish Adaptation Strategyexpected in February 2008.

In advance of this adaptation work the Scotland & Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research(SNIFFER) has been contributing to research, knowledge exchange and awareness raising activities in thefield of Climate Change Adaptation since 2001:

1. SNIFFER—Climate Change Adaptation Research:

— The business risks of climate change to public sector organisations.

— Survey of climate change activities for local authorities (2004).

— Handbook of Climate Trends across Scotland (2006).

— Preparing for a Changing Climate in Northern Ireland (2007).

2. SNIFFER—Climate Change Adaptation Activities:

— Awareness raising workshops for Scottish Local Authorities on Climate Change Impacts.

— Integrating Scotland’s data requirements into upcoming Climate Change Scenarios for UK.

— Publishing partnership research on climate change risks.

— Highlighting adaptation activities within UK Adaptation Policy Framework.

3. SNIFFER—provide secretariat for Scotland Climate Change Impacts Partnership (SCCIP):

SCCIP is an initiative commissioned by Scottish Government to bring together stakeholders inScotland to collectively address and prepare for the impacts of climate change, and provides aresearch and knowledge management service. The vision for SCCIP is to “increase the resilienceof organisations and infrastructure in Scotland to meet the challenges and opportunities presentedby the impacts of climate change”.

Members of the SCCIP Development Group include representatives of Scottish Government,Scottish Environment Protection Agency, UK Climate Impacts Programme and the SustainableScotland Network.

4. SCCIP outcomes to date:

— Awareness raising workshops for Scottish Local Authorities on Climate Change Impacts (May2006).

— Integrating Scotland’s data requirements into upcoming Climate Change Scenarios for UK(ongoing input to UKCIP08 users group).

— Highlighting adaptation activities within UK Adaptation Policy Framework.

— Launch and maintenance of SCCIP website www.sccip.org.uk

— Research project for Local Authorities—climate change mitigation and adaptation tools(November 2007).


— Contributing to the Local Authority Climate Change Declaration Support Group, andforthcoming Action Plan, as led by Sustainable Scotland Network, in support of Scotland’s LocalAuthorities meeting the commitments set out in the above Scotland’s Climate ChangeDeclaration.

5. SCCIP—current work programme:

The work programme for 2007–08 has a strong focus on providing support and tools to stakeholderinterests across Scotland. Key adaptation projects include:

— Local Climate Impacts Profiles for Local Authorities.

— Training courses on UKCIP08 Climate Change scenarios.

— Further engagement with sectors this year to identify their support and capacity building needs.


The Committee on Climate Change requires an open and accountable process for selection of committeemembers to ensure fair and appropriate representation across the diVerent levels of government across thewhole of the UK.



9. Are local authorities meeting their duty to enforce building regulations in relation to environmentalmeasures? Does the enforcement regime discourage non-compliance?


21 December 2007

Memorandum submitted by the Environmental Services Association

ESA is the sectoral trade association for the United Kingdom’s waste and secondary resourcemanagement industry, a sector contributing around £9 billion per annum to GDP. Our Members wish torecover more of the value contained in the UK’s waste whilst continuing to protect the environment andhuman health.

Mitigating Climate Change

The waste management industry handles huge volumes of waste carbon. This carbon can either contributeto UK emissions of greenhouse gases, mainly as a result of methane emissions from landfills, although asdescribed below this methane is also one of the UK’s main sources of renewable energy, or it can result innet reductions of emissions of greenhouse gases through energy recovery or materials recycling.

The waste management sector has already made significant strides in reducing emissions of greenhousegases. Between 1990 and 2005 methane emissions from landfill fell by 61%. Much of this reduction was aresult of methane being captured for energy recovery, oVsetting energy production from fossil fuels althoughsome methane has been flared. Modern landfills can capture over 80% of methane generated and as a resultproduce about one third of the UK’s renewable electricity.

However the UK faces a huge challenge if it is to comply further with EU law and deliver theGovernment’s objectives set out in the waste strategy:

— thousands of new, smaller and geographically dispersed waste management facilities are neededto replace landfills. National and local government policies must facilitate the development ofsuch facilities;

— Defra believes the UK must invest £11b in new waste management capacity by 2020; and

— England must reduce the annual amount of Biological Municipal Waste (BMW) landfilled to 11.2million tonnes by 2009–10, 7.5 million tonnes by 2012–13 and 5.2 million tonnes by 2020. If it doesnot, the UK will be liable for EU fines of up to £500,000 per day.


Since 2002, the Landfill Allowances Trading Scheme (LATS) and the landfill tax have been the principaldrivers to reduce the landfill of MSW but these policy instruments can only deliver compliance with EU lawand associated carbon savings if suYcient alternative infrastructure is available to manage waste.

A more responsive planning system is needed because obtaining planning permission remains the singlebiggest barrier to the timely delivery of new waste management infrastructure. The Planning Bill currentlyproceeding through Parliament should be used to ensure proposed planning reforms adequately addressEngland’s waste management needs in the context of the impending targets of the EU Landfill Directive.

In principle, the Government’s proposals to devise a National Policy Statement for waste could help todeliver a range of waste management infrastructure. However, the current focus on large scale infrastructureis too narrow: instead, policy should recognise that waste management facilities of varying sizes, types andcapacity are essential.

The reduced biodegradable content of Municipal Solid Waste (“MSW”) being sent to landfill will reducemethane generation in landfill. However given the lag in waste disposal, subsequent capping of the site, andthe beginning and peak of gas production, significant volumes of landfill gas will still be produced fordecades.

Operators should be incentivised to continue to capture and generate energy from landfill gas. HoweverHMG’s Energy Review in May 2007 actually reduced the incentive for operators to generate electricity fromlandfill gas by reducing economic support under the Renewables Obligation.

Given the right economic incentives, much more energy could be generated from waste—whether fromlandfill gas or other sources—using a range of technologies and oVsetting carbon emissions from fossil fuel-sourced energy. The UK continues to generate much less energy from waste than other Member States andESA has called consistently for all energy from the biodegradable fraction of MSW to be supported by theRenewables Obligation, no matter what technology is used to recover energy.

Adapting to Climate Change

While mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions will continue to be central to the UK’s response to climatechange, the high post-industrial levels of carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere mean that some of theimpacts of climate change are already unavoidable.

Climate change models suggest that flood risk in the UK will increase, with the likelihood of more intensestorms increasing as well. This will impact upon existing waste management infrastructure as well as aVectthe appropriateness of the design of new facilities. It is therefore essential that HMG provides the necessarysupport for planning authorities to consider properly climate change impacts when making long termdecisions about the location and design of waste management facilities.

The predicted climate change impacts will also have the potential to disrupt supporting infrastructure andbusiness continuity. It will become imperative for HMG to have suitable disaster plans in place to overcomedisruption and ensure that impacts to human health and the environment are minimised. Diverting wasteto alternative destinations in the event of disruption, coupled with the increasing risk of damage to sites,would also be likely to raise waste management costs.

21 December 2007

Memorandum submitted by Salix Finance Ltd

There are three types of action on climate change. The first is getting climate change up the corporateagenda so that energy eYciency becomes a strategic issue for the organisation. The second is theimplementation of no- and low-cost measures such as staV awareness campaigns, energy managementaudits, simple energy management measures such as closing the windows and active management of lightingand heating controls etc. The Carbon Trust supports organisations to do all this through its CarbonManagement Programme and other programmes.

The third action is investment—finding the capital to replace high carbon technologies with low carbonones. Salix Finance was set up in 2003 with Defra funding to help the public sector by setting up ring-fencedcapital loan funds, matched by and based in the organisation. These funds invest in discrete, cost-eVectiveenergy eYciency projects that pay back into the loan fund using the energy savings that they realise. Thefund is therefore replenished so that it can invest in more projects over time, and eventually becoming self-sustaining.

Salix has 72 clients across the UK in Local Government, Police and Fire authorities, Higher Education,NHS Foundation Trusts and Central Government. Between them our clients and Salix will be managingfunds of around £40 million by the end of the current financial year. So far our clients have saved 180,000tonnes of CO2 at a lifetime cost of £12/tCO2.


Our experience with these clients gives us a good insight into the barriers faced by Local Government andhow these barriers can be overcome. There are two main reasons why things go wrong.

The first barrier is lack of capital. In the past it was revenue budgets alone that were under pressure.However capital resources are now tight across the public sector and will get tighter in the nextspending round. So even when sustainability is a stated objective of the organisation, and a seniorDirector supports the project, the needs of the organisation’s core business come first when moneyis tight. Even relatively capital-rich authorities can have diYculty in assigning up-front capital forenergy eYciency when there are other projects that need support with greater political support.Also, energy eYciency projects can be “value engineered” out of a major project when capital isconstrained.

The second barrier is lack of people and skills. Implementing projects is a people-intensive process,needing commitments from several departments: Estates, Legal, Finance and Sustainability, andpossibly also the Chief Executive’s oYce. The support of elected Members can also be important.Pulling all this together needs someone with strong interpersonal skills as well as specialist skillssuch as procurement and project management, both of which can be in short supply in the publicsector. The combination of skills is diYcult to find in the energy management market, and whenthe right person can be found they are often severely over-stretched. The energy manager grade isalso relatively poorly paid and increasingly we are seeing energy managers moving from publicsector to private sector, where salaries are more attractive.

The Salix funding model is designed to help with the first barrier. The recycling nature of our funding alsomeans that energy savings from the revenue budget are used to oVset the initial capital outlay, and once theSalix loan is paid oV it can be used to support whatever the client wants. This makes a powerful andcompelling business case in organisations that are increasingly required to bring in spend-to-save fundingfrom outside the authority. Clearly with more funding we can support more clients, and we expect that ourfunding in future years will allow us to grow our support.

The resource barrier is much harder to tackle. With the resources at its disposal Salix on its own cannotsolve the problem, although we do allow clients to use our funding to support energy management at themargins so that they can implement the projects we fund. But this does not address the central problem; thatproject management and related skills are in short supply in the public sector. This is a matter for ourselves,the Carbon Trust, the Energy Saving Trust, Government, LGA, SOLACE and other sectoral groups. Wepropose that Government brings all sides together to discuss this as a matter of urgency as part of thedevelopment of the new LA performance framework.

Finally, Government policy is tightening on the public sector. The Climate Change Bill will have animpact on all sectors of the economy. Government is committed to take a leadership role to encourage othersto take action. Several sectors have energy eYciency targets (health and Central Government). All largerorganisations will be covered by the Carbon Reduction Commitment. The Energy Services Directive willrequire the public sector to demonstrate “exemplary performance”. And most importantly in localgovernment, the new performance framework will include carbon targets for the first time.

It is our view that a tightening policy environment is good for the environment in the long run. Howeveras a publicly-funded body Salix is at the coal-face because it provides the public sector with the tools theyneed to deliver on these policy commitments. At present it is very diYcult to predict what level of demandwe will see for our services, and over what timescale this demand will develop. There is a real risk that wewill be faced with demand that we cannot meet. We therefore also recommend that Government carries outa risk assessment of the possible impact of its policies on organisations like ourselves as part of the overallCSR process.

2 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by Northwest Regional Development Agency


Central Government has an important role to play in encouraging the adoption of regional and localtargets to stimulate action. In particular, Central Government can provide robust (and back calculated)data-sets, dis-aggregated to the regional/local level.

Central Government, through planning legislation, can set a strategic direction to encourage a significantshift in energy and waste infrastructure. Through other enabling legislation, Government can also stimulatebehavioural change through positive financial incentives. Doing the “right thing” should also be thecheapest and easiest course of action.


Additional funding, suitably targeted, is also a key enabling mechanism. Rather than create new fundingstreams, embedding carbon reduction criteria into all existing funding streams may well accelerate progressand stimulate improved awareness and behavioural change, perhaps initially for funding allocated throughLocal/Multi Area Agreements. There is an opportunity to ensure that carbon accounting is embedded intoall investment decisions, especially capital, utilising the SCC methodology. The public sector should beenabled to lead the way in low-carbon procurement specification and in developing low-carbon supplychains.

Governance structures on climate change are still developing both regionally and locally, robuststructures are critical and further advice and guidance from government on best practice would bewelcomed. Given the cross-sectoral nature of the issue there is also the potential for local authorities to betasked with developing climate change partnerships, akin to the requirement for Crime and DisorderReduction Partnerships, perhaps through LSP structures and/or at sub-regional level. At a regional level itis reasonable to expect Development Agencies to take a championing role on climate change, ensuring thatall key partners are brought together and work is coordinated. This is already happening in the Northwestthrough the Northwest Climate Change Partnership.


Clarity of roles is still developing. The Northwest is taking a lead in ensuring that all stakeholders areengaged at the appropriate level. Regionally, the Northwest Climate Change Partnership has beenestablished, the Northwest Climate Change Action Plan has been developed as a part of the RegionalEconomic Strategy, and the Northwest Climate Change Unit has been created to deliver it and monitorprogress. Given the high number of local authorities within the region (44), local delivery of the regionalClimate Change Action Plan is being developed through our five sub-regional economic partnerships (whicheach have local authorities as part of their membership), through the employment of dedicated coordinationresources and communications activities. It is however, too early to assess whether this approach is eVectivein ensuring coordination between the Regional Action Plan and local delivery.

The Nottingham Declaration has been promoted heavily within the Northwest, including workshops inall local authorities to promote sign-up. Currently approximately ² of local authorities have signed up andthis is providing an excellent first step in galvanising action. However, the eVectiveness of signing up toNottingham is not proven unless backed by the resources required to turn commitment into eVective action.Additionally we are aware that a number of non-signatories are performing well, if not better, throughactivities such as the Carbon Trusts’ Carbon Management Programme, and in embedding climate changeinto Sustainable Community Strategies and Local Area Agreements. The Nottingham Declaration shouldtherefore not be seen to be the benchmark for local authority activity on this issue, but rather a tool thatcan be used if necessary.


The delivery of the climate change agenda should be at the core of local and regional governance. Theperformance indicators are welcomed, should provide a real impetus for action at a local level, and providean opportunity to engage Local Strategic Partnerships through Local Area Agreements. However, it is yetto been seen whether this will bring about the level of activity and resource alignment required to deliverreal change, without integration in performance assessments. This could be particularly acute for the mostimportant indicator—community carbon emissions (NI186)—the data for which will be provided to localauthorities, and which without being performance assessed runs the risk of not being owned by the localauthority.


Ownership of emissions targets at the correct level is crucial if we are to establish eVective governance anddeliver real change. It is critical that national targets are disaggregated down to both the regional and locallevel, and in some circumstances at sub-regional or city-region level. There is concern however that thesetargets must be complementary and consistent. Local targets should cover those areas which localauthorities (and LSPs) have control, feeding into sub-regional and regional targets which can then bring in


areas outside of the scope of local authorities (high energy users, major roads, etc). There is current concernthat many regions are developing emissions inventories and targets, in the absence of disaggregated nationaltargets for the regions, but that locally there appears to be the start of local target setting through Defra’sNI 186, which has the potential to drive a wedge (or at the very least cause significant confusion) betweenlocal and regional.


The delay in finalising the national adaptation framework has not helped to advance adaptation responseat regional or local levels. The proposals in the draft climate change bill to support adaptation measures willhowever help to resolve this matter.

The establishment of UKCIP and the regional climate change partnerships 10 years ago have providedmuch required tools, identify good practices (adaptation wizard) and co-ordination of climate changeactivity respectively. In the North West a new partnership has been established to oversee the delivery ofthe region’s climate change action plan issued last year. In addition to the new partnership a new adaptationgroup has been established providing a regional focus on adaptation actions and measures. Many of theseinitiatives are being financially supported by the NWDA as many of the other regional partnerships haveonly limited resources to encourage action.

At a local level, many North West local authorities have signed up to the Nottingham declaration andare in the process of preparing sub-regional climate change strategies or action plans which include bothmitigation and adaptation. Again in general the focus is still typically on mitigation. The proposedadaptation national indicator will assist in driving adaptation initiatives by local authorities, but real actionwill be dependent upon them choosing this indicator for their local area agreement.

The next challenge will be ensuring there are appropriate and suYcient resources to implement theappropriate adaptation responses.


The Climate Change Commission needs to be aware of the need to support action at regional and locallevel, and not driving forward change that could be viewed as an imposition. It also needs to be aware ofthe diVering requirements of each of the regions and the disparities between economic activity and hencethe carbon impacts of them. There is a need to ensure that narrowing the gap in well-being and economicactivity between regions and localities is taken into account.


Local and regional government have a crucial role to play in ensuring that the mechanisms are in placeto mitigate and adapt to climate change, however it is becoming increasingly apparent that local concernsover relative competitiveness and impacts of practical solutions on communities are a barrier to progress.This is particularly apparent with regard to renewable and low carbon energy generation—from wind farmsto energy-from-waste projects—and in gaining support for low carbon development above and beyondbuilding regulations—which is a particular concern for areas of housing failure. Strong regional and subregional governance is crucial in order to overcome these barriers, in providing a holistic regional frameworkfor the delivery of the more diYcult solutions and in providing the leadership required.


The requirements in the supplement to PPS1 will be crucial for the medium term in delivering real changein the planning system, and in shaping the ability of local and regional government to respond to thischallenge. We are yet to fully digest the statement, however from initial assessment it appears that theStatement will significantly strengthen the planning systems’ response to the issue. Initial thoughts are:

— Reinforcing the link between travel and land use is very welcome, however paragraph 25 doescontain an understandable, but potentially undermining, opt-out for rural development.

— The support for decentralised energy across the statement is again very welcome. However, thereis a need for further assessment regionally of the impact that these targets will make, if appliedlocally, to centralised energy sources in the medium to long-term, and therefore the impact on ourRegional Energy Strategy.


— We also welcome the flexibility in the statement, allowing our leading local authority’s on climatechange to apply standards above both building regulations and RSS targets for decentralisedenergy, however there is a need to assess existing Merton-style policies to ensure compatibility withthe guidance.

Overall, the statement is welcome but its’ eVectiveness to drive change will be dependant upon the abilityof local planning authorities to apply its objectives. There is also a real need for continued funding todemonstrate low-carbon buildings and technologies, adaptation techniques, and to bring innovative low-carbon technologies to market. Helping to build the knowledge base of all stakeholders.


There is no evidence to suggest that local planning authorities are not discharging enforcement duties,however there is anecdotal evidence that the capacity of building control to respond to an increasinglychanging environment is proving costly and diYcult. This is especially true in circumstances when additionalrequirements such as the Merton Rule are adopted by authorities, when often Building Control have hadto be assisted by environmental colleagues in assessing and understanding the requirements. The issue ofresources available for enforcement will become increasingly important as new regulations on low-carbontechnologies increase, especially in enforcing and monitoring of small scale renewables.


This is an area which needs further support in the short term, there is a lot of positive activity and bestpractice developing, but the skills and knowledge required is not widespread. There is a critical role ofnational organisations in disseminating this best practice and ensuring that there is a central pool ofexpertise for the regions and local authorities to draw upon.

2 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs)

1. This response to the Environmental Audit Committee’s Inquiry into climate change and local, regionaland devolved government is submitted on behalf of England’s nine Regional Development Agencies(RDAs). A number of RDAs will also submit individual evidence to the Inquiry to elaborate on the issuesaddressed in this response.

2. The RDAs’ mission is to transform England’s regions through sustainable economic development. Inthe period since our establishment in 1999, the RDAs’ strategic role has deepened and broadened across theregional economic landscape. RDAs’ core intervention areas have grown to encompass enterprise,innovation, business support, regeneration, economic inclusion and skills development. The changesannounced in the recent Sub-National Review of Economic Development & Regeneration will furtherRDAs’ remit (except in London 8) where the GLA Act 2007 has already assigned further powers to theMayor of London, including a statutory duty to tackle climate change mitigation and adaptation).


3. Strong action is already being taken at regional and local level. RDAs’ established regional leadershiprole in shaping strategies and mobilising partners; our delivery role in supporting businesses,commercialising new technologies and innovations; and our investment role in physical regeneration anddevelopment, means RDAs are already helping regions address the challenges and opportunities of climatechange. Our track record in developing creative and innovative approaches to the economic dimensions ofclimate change; our ability to bring regional and sub-regional partners (public, private and third sector) tothe table; and our strengths as a network in disseminating good practice are delivering a step-change in theresponse to the climate change agenda. Regional Development Agencies recently published a pamphletsetting out the action we are taking to tackle climate change and making a series of commitments tofuture action.

4. We believe that to be a leading competitive global economy we need to be an exemplar at home anda leader internationally and RDAs are committed to leading that agenda at regional and sub-regional level.Such actions should be seen in the context of the clear understanding at regional level, as set out in RegionalEconomic Strategies (RES), that quality of life and living within environmental limits represents a


competitive advantage for England’s regions. When powers are devolved to the regional level, RDAs andother regional and local bodies are proving their ability to deliver carbon emission reductions throughinnovative action. All regions are already making emission reduction savings, often led by RDAs, and willcontinue to do so as the urgency of climate change increases.

Setting and Achieving Targets

5. Central government has a vital role to play in setting national targets and encouraging the adoptionof regional and local targets to stimulate action. Please refer to our answer to Question 4 for detailed viewson setting and achieving targets.

Policy Framework and Strategic Influencing

6. Through the policy it drafts and implements, central government can drive forward action onmitigation and adaptation and other climate change related areas. There needs to be a mainstream andconsistent climate change and carbon reduction policy and strategy framework nationally and regionallywith policies and priorities based on common and robust evidence and intelligence. Whilst progress has beenmade, there remains a lack of consistency across government in the desire and implementation of policy onclimate change. The Climate Change Bill should help to address this, but behavioural change acrossgovernment departments and national public sector bodies is also required to achieve the necessary stepchange. By embedding climate change considerations into policy development, government can set astrategic direction which will drive change. For example, through planning legislation, it can set a strategicdirection to encourage a significant shift in energy and waste infrastructure. It must also seek to minimiseinconsistencies between its policies. Enabling powers in the draft Climate Change Bill, have insuYcientemphasis on facilitating new instruments across all areas of policy to actually deliver emissions reductionsand these therefore need to be strengthened.

7. Embedding consistent carbon reduction criteria into all government funding streams is critical toaccelerating progress, driving innovation and helping to achieve behaviour change which is needed. Ratherthan creating new, separate funding streams specifically designed to address climate change, it might beappropriate for the Government to use existing architecture and try to mainstream the issue of climatechange by driving action forward through existing and proposed new mechanisms. For example,hypothecated landfill tax receipts in the form of the BREW programme can make a significant contributionto tackling climate change; however, there needs to be a strong regional and sub-regional component toBREW funding if regional and local energy and dynamism in this arena is to be incentivised. A trulyambitious Defra in this regard might, for instance, increase the relative sub-national BREW funding streamsvis-a-vis current, often nationally segmented approaches to funding. This would reinforce the emergingSingle Regional Strategies (together with any climate change indicators that are agreed as part of thosestrategies) and LAA/MAA approaches to sub-national development. However, in fact, indications suggestDefra intend to do precisely the opposite of this—reinforcing nationally-segmented streams and reducingor eliminating sub-national commissioning through the RDAs. This is likely to be a significant disruptionto sub-national delivery in the short-run, and is arguably counter to the intentions of SNR in the medium-term. At the very least, decisions on the amount of funding RDAs can expect (if any), to create the capacityto deliver their component of the Business Resource, EYciency and Waste (BREW) Programme in 08/09,has not yet been announced which makes it very diYcult to maintain momentum of existing initiatives, andforward plan with partners.

8. The Government needs to recognise the importance of regions and cities in tackling climate change.There is no mention of regions in the Climate Change Bill. There also needs to be a stronger endorsementof the need to deliver low carbon cities.

Additional Investment

9. The Government needs to provide additional investment, via existing regional and local infrastructure,in skills development and training packages, in research and development, in promoting innovation and inattracting inward investment. The RDAs currently fund over 12% of the publicly supported R&Dinvestment in energy (including renewables), enabling us to spearhead work in the development of lowcarbon technologies. This work could benefit, however, from additional public funding for science,innovation and R&D which prioritises interventions that accelerate a genuine shift to a low carboneconomy. RDAs play an important role in promoting and supporting innovation; the recent report of theCommission on Environmental Markets (CEMEP) highlighted the importance of innovation support andcreating forward markets (eg through public sector procurement) in creating a low-carbon economy and toposition UK business to capture global market share in low-carbon technology and services. The RDAs willneed to work closely with government on delivering these aspirations. RDAs play a significant role in theskills development agenda. We are working to identify the new skills needed to face the challenges andopportunities for the future and are working with partners to enhance entrepreneurial and leadership skills.We are working with the Sector Skills Councils to ensure that need is recognised and accommodated andwith schools, FE and HE institutions to consider the need for adaptation of the curriculum to develop the


knowledge, understanding and skills required on this agenda. Some RDAs have even been helping with thedelivery of targeted training programmes, for example, South West RDA is funding a programme to helpbuild capacity within local authority councillors on renewable energy issues whilst emda is delivering a greeninfrastructure awareness and capacity training programme for local planners. All of these areas of work,however, require additional investment from government if they are to drive forward the pace at whichchanges are taking place.

Transport

10. National and regional transport priorities need to promote integrated and sustainable transportchoices with key investments and improvements delivered swiftly and eVectively. The Department forTransport has recently published a discussion document “Towards a Sustainable Transport System—Supporting Economic Growth in a Low Carbon World”. This sets out the Department’s response to theEddington study and Stern review. This includes five strategic goals for transport including one (goal 2) thatseeks to address climate change by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Thepaper recognises that various actions should be taken forward to address these including behavioural changemeasures, making better use of our existing transport system, technological innovations, pricing signals,regulation and enforcement, and enhanced public transport services, as well as investment in infrastructure.It is vitally important that Government guidance on transport appraisal techniques, and schemedevelopment mechanisms, are refreshed to ensure that the greenhouse gas consequences of these actions arefully considered. The guidance should also incorporate advice on handling the adaptability of transportproposals to climate change.

11. This will ensure that as interventions come forward for funding from scheme promoters (includinglocal authorities), the climate change consequences are fully considered, and that resilient transportnetworks are developed. In addition, it will be important that these impacts are also reflected in otherdecision-making processes such as transport prioritisation exercises for the Regional Funding Allocations.The proposed review of the Department’s “New Approach to Transport Appraisal” will be a key mechanismthrough which these can be incorporated, but it will be important that as other DfT guidance is publishedit also reflects these issues.

12. The current technology development platforms are a vital lever for funding and stimulating regionalactivity. In addition, there should be greater rollout of the “Sustainable Travel Towns” concept currentlybeing piloted in Darlington with funding from the Department of Transport. In a relatively short timescalea 12% shift from car use to public transport has been achieved.


13. The RDAs view their role as providing regional leadership on the economic dimensions of climatechange, both adaptation and mitigation. This includes developing markets for low-carbon technology andservices, along with support for R&D and innovation in key sectors (eg environmental technology).

14. RDAs are currently responsible for leading the development of Regional Economic Strategies (RES)which shape the growth and development of the regions. AWM and EEDA are both in the process ofproducing low carbon RES, building on the low carbon focus which SEEDA introduced into their RES lastyear and all RDAs are committed to including carbon reduction targets within their Corporate Plans. TheSub-National Review of Economic Development and Regeneration (SNR) has tasked RDAs (with theexception of London) with leading the development of Single Integrated Regional Strategies which willbring together the Regional Economic Strategy and the Regional Spatial Strategy and cover economicgrowth, planning and housing, as well as setting out social and environmental objectives for each region.These will replace the existing Regional Economic Strategies. RDAs will be ensuring that climate changeadaptation and mitigation and low carbon aspirations are embedded in these Single Regional Strategieswhich will direct the investments of many public and private sector partners at regional, sub-regional andlocal level. It should be noted that many aspects of the Sub-National Review will not apply to London,however the Mayor now has additional duties relating to climate change. The London Development Agencyis playing a key role in helping to deliver the Mayor of London’s Climate Change Action Plan, with theMayor having made tackling climate change central to many policy areas over which he has powers. Theambitious Climate Change Action Plan aims to stabilise London’s CO2 emissions in 2025 at 60% below 1990levels and LDA’s recently launched Green Homes and Green Organisations programmes will make asignificant contribution to delivering this target. RDAs have also committed to influencing key public andprivate sector partners to support regional carbon targets and adopt further voluntary targets.

15. All of the RDAs are supporting Regional Climate Change Partnerships and a number of RDAs havelead on the process of developing Regional Climate Change Action Plans, whilst others have just starteddown this route. The Regional Climate Change Action Plans, combined with the new Single RegionalStrategies (where applicable), should provide the clarity as to which organisations are contributing to which


aspects of climate change. It will be important that both of these documents provide the same strategicdirection and clarity to ensure they become the valuable tools they have the potential to be; identifying theroles local authorities, sub-regional bodies and regional bodies can play to contribute cohesively toaddressing climate change.

16. RDAs believe that they should act as exemplar organisations for carbon reduction, demonstratingto private and public sector organisations the potential to change and as such have launched a number ofcommitments. We have committed to having environmental/carbon management systems in place by 2010with the view to becoming carbon neutral. We are committed to setting carbon reduction targets in ourCorporate Plans and publishing the carbon we expect to save as a result of implementing our policies andprogrammes in 2010 and 2020. We are also committed to ensuring that all capital build projects that RDAsinvest in strive towards achieving the BREEAM “Excellent” standard (or equivalent) including a percentageof recyclate material and a percentage of energy supplied by renewable energy.

17. Through RDA stewardship of sub-national business support, we are supporting businesses toimprove the environmental footprint and eYciency of their operations. We are currently piloting thedelivery of resource eYciency advice to SMEs through the Business Link network, an outcome resultingfrom the jointly chaired Healey/Ellis2 Taskforce on Business Resource EYciency. RDAs are at the heartof the Business Support Simplification agenda and, as such, are encouraging the mainstreaming of businesssupport programmes and the progression of businesses towards a low carbon economy. We are also hostinga number of staV from other organisations working with businesses (eg Envirowise, Carbon Trust, WRAP).In addition, RDAs are delivering business growth in environmental and energy sectors through ourenterprise and innovation interventions and accelerating the commercialisation and diVusion of newtechnologies. A number of RDAs have invested, for example, in Enterprise Hubs or Centres of Excellence(eg the Joules Centre in the North West), set up Renewable Energy Agencies (eg Renewables East),established Regional Knowledge Transfer Networks (eg EnerrgiSE) or delivery vehicles (eg the LondonClimate Change Agency).

18. Regional Development Agencies are also investing in improving the evidence base associated withclimate change. RDAs collectively fund SCPnet, a partnership between the RDAs, Regional Assemblies,Environment Agency and WWF-UK which collects data and evidence on sustainable consumption andreduction. RDAs are using SCPnet directly to identify trends in resource eYciency across 49 sectors and towork out regional eco-footprints. The RDAs have also developed and piloted a number of approaches toprovide more consistent monitoring information. Emda has developed R-ISEW, the first regional compositeindicator integrating economic, social and environmental costs/benefits, Yorkshire Forward has piloted amethodology for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions associated with RDA projects and NWDA hasdeveloped the Enworks Toolkit, a monitoring tool that can be used by business as an improvement tool anda way of justifying cost actions.

19. In terms of monitoring and accountability, there needs to be recognition of existing monitoring andreporting requirements which local and regional bodies are subject to and an understanding that theseexisting requirements are likely to deliver evidence of the action being taken to deliver against the climatechange agenda.


20. The RDAs welcome the inclusion of climate change mitigation and adaptation indicators in the newPerformance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority Partnerships. Performance indicatorshave the potential to provide a real impetus for action at a local level. It is important that they are backedup with clear advice from government for regional and local bodies on how emission savings should becalculated and reported.

4. To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanUK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030, fittogether with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions, and the impact of carbon reduction policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

21. Ownership of emissions targets at the correct level is crucial if the Government is to establish eVectivegovernance and deliver real change. There needs to be a robust and consistent process for cascading targetsfrom the national level through the regions to local authorities. There needs to be a clear line of sight betweentargets in the Regional Economic Strategies and the Local Area Agreements (LAAs) currently being takenforward by government with local government. Targets need to exist at regional and local level and, in some

2 Richard Ellis is Chair of EEDA, the Regional Development Agency in the East of England.


circumstances, at sub-regional or city-region level. As time moves on, regions have started to identify theirown targets in the absence of disaggregated national targets for the regions. It is important that theGovernment’s Climate Change programme targets and these regional targets knit together and, further, thatinnovative action by regional bodies be accounted for by the Government’s Climate Change Programme.Regional activity is generating additional carbon savings and without this recognition, there will not beclarity on how the UK’s overall carbon reduction targets are being met. Locally, there appears to be thestart of local target setting through Defra’s NI 186. This approach, which sees regions and local authoritiessetting their own targets, has the potential to cause significant confusion. The targets should becomplementary and consistent. Local targets should cover those areas which local authorities and LSPs cancontrol and should connect to sub-regional and regional targets. The new Integrated Regional Strategiesshould recognise these targets.

22. Central government needs to provide robust and back-calculated datasets, disaggregated to theregional/local level, to support this process. Whilst some regions have developed their own greenhouse gasinventories, government needs to provide data and funding by way of assistance in establishing inventoriesand baselines.


23. Whilst the role of national government in providing climate change adaptation needs to bestrengthened, adaptation is best undertaken at local level by, for example, local authorities in partnershipwith other agencies including the Environment Agency and RDAs. The RDAs want to ensure that they andthe regions can deliver more economic growth while reducing carbon emissions and enhancing the resilienceof our regions’ communities, infrastructure, utilities and private sector to the eVects of climate change.

24. The Government role should be to facilitate action by promoting good practice and providingrecommendations on approaches, the extent of adaptation that may be required across the UK, the costsof the adaptive measures and the future financial implications of not adapting. The Government also needsto provide more funding and fiscal incentives for investment in adaptation activity, especially climate-resilient infrastructure, and remove policy barriers that prevent adaptation uptake.

25. Regional activity on adaptation is underway but the RDAs recognise that there is still more to do toachieve eVective co-ordination and delivery. The North East, for example, is currently undertaking aClimate Change Adaptation Strategy with buy-in from a range of regional partners, EEDA is supportingthe development of a Climate Change Action Plan with a focus on adaptation and NWDA is funding anadaptation group. The Mayor of London is preparing a world first comprehensive climate changeadaptation strategy for a city covering risks such as heatwave, drought and flooding, which the LDA willhelp to deliver. The London, East of England and South East Climate Change Partnerships have publisheda guide for developers on climate change adaptation, together with a set of case studies. They have alsocommissioned a study, due to report shortly, on retrofitting existing buildings for adaptation to climatechange.

26. The proposed Local Area Agreement adaptation indicator will help to embed and drive adaptationactivity by local authorities if selected.


27. The RDAs stated in their response to the draft Climate Change Bill that the Committee shouldinclude regional representation to ensure that it provides advice to the Government which recognises thediversity of regions and the contribution that they can make to tackling climate change through fit-for-purpose policy. The Government’s response was that the Committee should consist of experts, notrepresentatives of stakeholder groups, that it is up to the Committee to decide how to do this and that it hasthe power to establish sub-committees. The RDAs believe that regional and local government are key todelivering emissions reductions and that the Committee needs to be aware of and support action at regionaland local level. The Committee must therefore have a mechanism for engaging with regional and localstakeholders, including RDAs, to ensure that regional programmes are recognised and that there is co-ordination between the national level and the regions on carbon budgets, targets and accounting. TheClimate Change Bill is silent on this matter.


28. The RDAs believe that their commitments to tackling climate change are significant, but that theirimpact can be immeasurably multiplied by a similar level of commitment from national, regional and sub-regional partners and by the Government taking action to remove barriers.


29. The Government needs to provide a clear and consistent policy and strategy framework for climatechange with carbon reduction being mainstreamed nationally and regionally and appropriate enablingpolicies put in place. Such a framework needs to provide a stable long-term direction of travel in order togive confidence to business, but also include challenging short-term targets to stimulate the market-placeand supply chains (eg on low energy appliances). The Government’s climate change priorities need to beapplied consistently across the breadth of mainstream policy development and Public Service Agreementsand through the way national targets are manifested in regional and local policy frameworks (eg Local AreaAgreements).

30. Policies and priorities should be based on common and robust evidence and intelligence. Aspreviously stated, Government has a vital contribution to make to this evidence at regional and local levelas the evidence base needs to be used to establish baselines and monitor progress towards targets.

31. All regions will only be able to realise their full potential to reduce carbon emissions if Governmentremoves key barriers such as subsidies for unsustainable products/services and makes changes to our currentenergy infrastructure to support a low carbon economy. We are pleased to see that the new Planning PolicyStatement on Climate Change is encouraging decentralised distributed renewable energy supplies as deliveryof robust renewable energy projects needs to be accelerated through the planning system. There areparticular concerns about the competitiveness and practicality of renewable and low carbon energygeneration at community level. Current barriers include regulatory licence exemptions that limit themaximum size of electricity generation plant exempt from the burdens of a Supply Licence (projectstherefore tend to minimise their size in order to remain exempt) and the cost of connection to the grid. Theregulatory and market structure for electricity also needs to be adapted to reflect the diVerent scale andeconomics of decentralised energy, in contrast to centrally generated and supplied electricity. In particular,planning and regulatory changes are needed to provide more incentive for renewables and Combined Heatand Power (CHP).

32. It is vital that the Government take rapid action to introduce a comprehensive system of carbonpricing. This is a major barrier to action at all levels. It would better enable low and zero carbon technologiesto compete against traditional energy supply technologies and therefore encourage the commercialimplementation of low and zero carbon energy projects.


33. Planning is crucial to eVectively tackle the issues being raised by climate change. The recent LocalGovernment Association (LGA) report on councils and climate change highlights planning as one of thefour areas in which local authorities can make a diVerence. The requirements in the supplement to PPS1 willbe crucial for the medium term in delivering real change in the planning system and in shaping the abilityof local and regional government to this challenge. RDAs are yet to fully digest this Statement but frominitial assessment it appears that the Statement is broadly welcome with new recommendations for planningauthorities.

34. We are hopeful that the Statement will streamline the planning process to reduce delays in decision-making, thereby making it easier to develop decentralised energy and more widespread microgeneration.The Merton Rule plays an important role in encouraging development of renewables and we would like tosee it applied more consistently to delivering decentralised energy networks. Some regions and localauthorities are already setting high standards, for example, the Mayor of London is proposing thatdevelopments achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of 20% from onsite renewable energyregeneration because developers are already routinely meeting the current 10% standard in London.


35. There is anecdotal evidence that there is a lack of compliance with building regulations on new-builddomestic properties, despite local authorities eVorts to discharge their enforcement duties. We believe thatlocal authorities need to be given the resources to enable them to ensure that developers are complying withadditional requirements such as for carbon reduction through the use of renewables, an issue which willaccelerate in demand as eVorts are made to meet the Government’s ambition for zero carbon homes by 2016.

36. The twin-track approach to improving energy eYciency, using both the planning system and buildingregulations, can be confusing. RDAs would like to see the building regulations strengthened as quickly aspossible with adequate training of enforcement oYcials so that building regulations become the main meansof delivering uniformly high energy eYciency.



37. The RDAs have national mechanisms in place, facilitated by EEDA as the climate change lead, forsharing good practice amongst themselves through both national meetings where all RDAs come together todiscuss issues relating to climate change and through an online RDA-only resource. In addition, the RDAsperiodically publish national documents setting out current RDA activity. For example, we published anational pamphlet on tackling climate change earlier in the year, whilst in the past, we have published setsof case studies on regional sustainable development activity (Smart Productivity and Smart Growth) whichwe have shared widely with partners and interested parties. RDAs are also involved in sharing good practiceat a local and sub-regional level with partners; activity which is better explained in the individualsubmissions you will receive from some RDAs.

38. Sharing of good practice with other agencies does need further support in the short-term to helpensure that successful initiatives are eVectively rolled out, as the skills and knowledge are not yet widespread.There is a critical role of national organisations in disseminating this best practice and ensuring that thereis a central pool of expertise for the regions and local authorities to draw upon. Groups such as the RegionalEnergy Group, whose members include RDAs, are useful for sharing best practice and information onregional initiatives. It is important that suYcient Government funding be provided to Government-fundeddelivery agents and programmes such as the Energy Saving Trust, Carbon Saving Trust and BusinessResource EYciency and Waste programme to enable regional and local bodies to continue to benefit fromtheir expertise, such as through the Carbon Trust’s Local Authority Energy Financing Scheme.

39. The Energy Savings Trust plays an important role in disseminating good practice and its website witha list of publications is viewed as a valuable resource. Primarily, the Energy Savings Trust has providedsupport in the domestic energy sector. This is critical given that 28% of CO2 emissions come from this sector.The Energy Savings Trust is working with RDAs in some regions to deliver specific activity. The North Easthosted a trial Sustainable Energy Network which was well received and the rollout of Sustainable EnergyNetworks across the country will ensure holistic advice is provided to householders. The announcement byGordon Brown that a Green Homes Service will be rolled out supports the notion that taking a holisticapproach to energy reduction is the most eVective way forward.

40. The Carbon Trust is working closely with RDAs in some regions to help businesses improve theirenergy eYciency. The Carbon Trust has excellent examples of how reducing energy demand is extremelycost eVective and some RDAs have found that useful.

41. The UK Climate Impacts Programme provides an invaluable source of expertise and support,assisting both with the development of policy for climate change adaptation and advice on implementation.It is important that the UK Climate Impacts Programme continues to provide robust scenarios, includingat regional and local level, and to assist public bodies’ adaptation improvement now required in the ClimateChange Bill. As the planning and decision-making processes of both the public and private sector rely onclimate change projections, it is essential that UKCIP is funded to continue to provide up-to-date scientificexpertise in this rapidly developing area.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the East of England Development Agency

Introduction—The East of England Development Agency

1. The East of England Development Agency (EEDA) welcomes the opportunity to respond to theEnvironmental Audit Committee’s Inquiry into climate change and local, regional and devolvedgovernment.

2. EEDA is the driving force behind sustainable economic growth and regeneration in the East ofEngland (Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Norfolk, SuVolk, and the unitary authorityareas of Luton, Peterborough, Southend and Thurrock). Our task is to improve the region’s economicperformance and ensure the East of England remains one of the UK’s top performing regions. In the periodsince our establishment in 1999, EEDA’s strategic role has deepened and broadened across the regionaleconomic landscape and the changes announced in the recent Sub-National Review of EconomicDevelopment & Regeneration will further our remit. EEDA’s core intervention areas have grown toencompass enterprise, innovation, business support, regeneration, economic inclusion and skillsdevelopment. EEDA takes its statutory purpose to contribute to sustainable development extremelyseriously and is committed to being an exemplar and leader on the climate change.

3. EEDA’s current budget of £140 million is just over 0.1% of the value of the region’s economy. Wetherefore pursue our purposes by setting and shaping the direction of the region principally through theRegional Economic Strategy (RES); we persuade and influence others to contribute to that RES; and weset out to deliver a small number of interventions with our resources that catalyse that process.


4. Climate change poses a very real threat to the East of England. Our low lying geography, vulnerablecoastline and already scarce resources make the East of England the region most at threat from climatechange in the UK. EEDA is well-placed to help the region to respond to this threat. There is, however, alsoa strong economic opportunity rationale for our focus on tackling climate change. The Stern Reportidentified a powerful economic argument for taking early action and indicated that action on climate wouldcreate significant business opportunities with markets potentially growing to be worth hundreds of billionsof dollars each. The region is already the UK leader in the production of renewable energy and predictionsof 45% growth in the global environmental technologies sector by 2015, coupled with a large proportion ofthe UK’s environmental goods and services sector being located in the region, means that the East ofEngland has the potential to also become a leader in supplying future demand for low carbon technologies.

5. In our regional leadership role, EEDA is in the process of reviewing the Regional Economic Strategy(RES) which will drive sustainable economic development in the East of England to 2031. One of the threeheadline ambitions for the RES is to reduce the levels of CO2 emissions and accelerate the decoupling ofresource use from economic growth. Under this aspiration the Strategy is looking to deliver growth anddevelopment within a specific target for carbon reduction; to harness the world-class expertise of thecompanies and universities in the region in environmental science, clean technologies and carbon captureand storage; to embed a culture of resource eYciency and environmental management within the businesssector; and to incentivise construction and physical development to perform to high environmentalstandards. We are championing the inclusion in the RES of a target of 60% reduction in CO2 emissions by2030. We are also driving forward the development of a Regional Climate Change Action Plan and hostingthe Regional Climate Change Partnership Manager, as well as continuing our investment in the regionalSustainable Development Roundtable.

EEDA’s Organisational Activity

6. EEDA is seeking to lead by becoming an organisational exemplar. We expect to achieve ISO 140001in early 2008, alongside renewal of our EMS accreditation. EEDA has an internally based cross directorateSustainable Development Steering Group and an Energy Champions Group and has initiated work toretrofit our oYce accommodation as a model for the 95% of the regional businesses which will not haveaccess to new-build oYces.

7. EEDA has traditionally used the East of England Sustainable Development Toolkit to ensure proofingfor all of our strategy and programme development work. Last year we supported and worked with InspireEast (the EEDA funded Regional Centre of Excellence for Regeneration and Renewal) and BRE to developthe Excellence Framework, a comprehensive sustainability tool, based on the Sustainable CommunitiesPlan, to aid the use of standards within the whole project life cycle (design, concept developmentimplementation and monitoring). As part of EEDA’s renewal of our own project management processes,we are now using the Excellence Framework to underpin all projects. In addition, EEDA has set in placeminimum standards for all our investment, based on the Excellence Framework, to support ourcommitment to reducing the region’s carbon footprint.

8. Alongside EEDA’s own Sustainable and Rural Development Team we also host Regional Managersfrom the Carbon Trust, Envirowise, WRAP (Waste Resources and Action Programme), the BiodiversityForum and the Climate Change Partnership to ensure broader coherence when delivering advice.

Leading the Region in Addressing Climate Change

9. EEDA is committed to driving forward the pace of change within the region, using the full range ofits work to eVect a diVerence. We have been at the driving edge of renewables, instigated a national pilot todrive resource eYciency advice through Business Link, prioritised a low carbon theme for our Europeanfunding, created environmental innovation centres and will shortly be launching a carbon campaigntargeted at communities.

10. EEDA has been at the cutting edge of stimulating economic activity in order to deliver a low cost,reliable and secure low carbon energy supply into the economy, as demonstrated in 2003 with the creationof Renewables East (RE), the regional renewable energy agency. RE has been tasked with encouraging theregion to meet its renewable energy targets, with the East of England now on course to meet its target of14% electricity from renewables by 2010. EEDA and RE with support from other stakeholders have beeninstrumental in securing the renewable transport fuel obligation and banding of the Renewables ObligationCertificates to increase the viability of oVshore renewables and bioenergy. The region has also been at theforefront of Anaerobic Digestion bringing forward a new digestate standard. Finally EEDA alongside theEuropean Regional Development Fund (ERDF), SuVolk County Council and Waveney District Councilhave invested £9.5 million to bring forward OrbisEnergy, an enterprise hub at the centre of encouragingoVshore renewable energy.

11. Through EEDA’s mainstream business support activity, we are driving the private sector to recognisethe benefits of resource eYciency. As a result of EEDA’s Chair, Richard Ellis, jointly chairing a BusinessResource EYciency Taskforce with John Healey, the RDAs collectively oVered to develop and pilot amainstream business resource eYciency advice service routed through Business Link. In addition to EEDA’s


national leadership of this pilot, we have integrated it into the Information, Diagnostic and Brokerage (IDB)oVer in our region and will have provided resource eYciency advice to 1000 businesses in the region by theend of March 2008. In addition EEDA has supported a number of key businesses to form part of thebrokerage supply chain for extended business support, brokered by Business Link, in innovative areas suchas waste exchange, as well as reduction and eYciency etc. In 2007, we helped BITC to deliver the Prince ofWales’ aspiration of national and regional MayDay Summits focused on securing climate change pledgesfrom business and we will be continuing our support in 2008.

12. EEDA is also prioritising a low carbon economy theme through other business support programmeswhich it manages. EEDA will be managing part of the new EU Rural Development Programme and the EURegional Development programme for the 2007–13 period and both these programmes are targeted towardsachieving impacts in areas such as business resource eYciency and innovation in low carbon technology.For creativity and entrepreneurship in business, EEDA has, this year, also taken its highly successfulRunning the Gauntlet competition and added a low carbon element to it. Through this competition, whichhas been running over the last three years, EEDA has mentored and facilitated the development ofnumerous new businesses in the region.

13. EEDA’s innovation interventions are being prioritised to deliver business growth in energy andenvironmental sectors. EEDA has, for example, invested in an innovation centre in Peterborough to supportthe growth of the city’s hi-tech environmental technology cluster which consists of 340 companies to date.EEDA is also investing in the Centre for Sustainable Engineering (CSEng), a national clearing house forinformation, expert analysis, practical application and knowledge transfer linked to low carbontechnologies.

14. We also believe that behavioural change in the community has a vital role to play in delivering change.EEDA is on the brink of launching a new campaign aimed at mobilising communities in the East of Englandto come together to tackle their carbon emissions. The multi-million pound Cut Your Carbon Campaignwill encourage and enable communities to take action to reduce their footprint and enter a competition towin funding for more costly carbon reduction actions. This work will build on our experience of theUniversity of East Anglia CRED programme, which EEDA facilitated the creation of in 2003, which isreducing carbon emissions by 35,000 tonnes per annum from households and industry and has a globalnetwork extending into the USA and China.

15. To underpin its regeneration activity, EEDA has funded projects such as Smartlife, which supportsthe delivery of sustainable skills using expertise from at home and internationally to increase the skillscapacity of the region to deliver areas of activity such as sustainable construction for example.


16. Central government needs to recognise that local authorities and regional bodies are already takingaction on mitigation, adaptation and other climate change related areas, often in partnership, and that itneeds to support and encourage this work. In the East of England, for example, a regional Climate ChangePartnership has been established, with a coordinator jointly funded by EEDA, Go-East and EERA, andwork is underway on developing a Regional Climate Change Action Plan. The new Regional EconomicStrategy for the region incorporates a focus on reducing CO2 emissions and intends to set a carbon reductiontarget, whilst the Regional Spatial Strategy has also set challenging targets. The EU funding which EEDAwill be responsible for from 2008 has a low carbon metatheme and the region is on target to achieve 14% ofits energy from renewable sources by 2010. Businesses are being engaged in the climate change agendathrough the mainstreaming of resource eYciency advice through Business Link and EEDA’s Running theGauntlet competition which had a low carbon focus this year. Behavioural change is being driven throughEEDA’s soon to be launched Community Cut Your Carbon Campaign and through our investment in acarbon calculator for land-based businesses. Renewables East, established by EEDA, has delivered trainingand support to local authorities on renewable energy planning matters with the region enjoying a high levelof planning application approvals as a direct result. However, whilst there is a lot of activity alreadyunderway, there is still more to do and central government has a role to play in helping the region toachieve this.

17. To facilitate regional and local action, the Government needs to set the strategic direction, removebarriers to action on climate change and provide the evidence base to drive change.

Setting and achieving targets

18. The Eastern region intends to establish an ambitious carbon reduction target for inclusion in the newRegional Economic Strategy which will come into eVect in April 2008. However, there is still no clarity asto whether the Government intends to cascade national targets to regional and local level or whether itexpects regions and local authorities to establish their own targets which will be amalgamated into thenational target. There is also uncertainty as to whether regional/local targets as set by central government


will be legally binding and, if they are, how the Government will ensure fit with the targets which havealready been set by regions or whether the expectation is that the existing regional/local targets will beabandoned in favour of the Government’s targets.

19. The Government needs to make a clear, urgent decision on how it intends to handle regional and localcarbon reduction targets. It needs to ensure that regional/local administrations are given the flexibility toalign Local Area Agreement (LAA) targets and the targets set in Regional Economic Strategies. It needs toconnect its Climate Change Programme targets to the regional targets which have been set. The Governmentneeds to take into account the carbon emission reductions being delivered at regional/local level andunderstand how this contributes to the UK’s overall carbon reduction target. In addition, EEDA wouldsuggest that, if the region has set its own target in the absence of a government steer, then the Governmentshould seek to support that target in any decisions it takes.

20. There is a lack of data on which to found regional/local carbon targets. Regional/local bodies wouldtherefore benefit from central government providing robust and back-calculated datasets, disaggregated tothe regional/local level. Whilst the region has commissioned its own evidence base, there would be merit inconsistent information being made available to all regions to allow comparability.

Policy framework and strategic influencing

21. Government needs to set the national policy and strategy framework for climate change activity andcarbon reduction. At the moment, there is a lack of coherence between government policies. TheGovernment needs to embed climate change considerations into mainstream policy development usingrobust evidence and intelligence which can be disaggregated to regional/local level to ensure cohesion withpolicy development and implementation at more devolved levels. The Government must not allow climatechange to be treated as an issue for one government department but must ensure that all governmentdepartments consider climate change when formulating policy. Providing a coherent strategic directionthrough national policies is critical to enabling eVective, coherent action to tackle climate change at national,regional and local level. The three tiers should be working towards the same goals through a co-ordinatedset of policies.

22. Where regional Climate Change Action Plans have been established, government should have regardto them when formulating national policy. In its expectations of the new Integrated Regional Strategies,government should recognise the contribution they can make to the climate change agenda and ensure thatthese strategies are both encouraged to incorporate this element and that regional, sub-regional and localpartners are tied in to delivering against this strategy. The Government must not create a situation wherelocal authorities are being asked to respond to one set of targets which do not align with regional targetsand aspirations.

23. In regard to transport, DfT needs to deliver against its recent discussion document, “Towards aSustainable Transport System—Supporting Economic Growth in a Low Carbon World”, in a mannerwhich enables regional and local transport decisions to promote integrated and sustainable transportchoices. It is vitally important that government guidance of transport appraisal techniques and schemedevelopment mechanisms are refreshed to ensure that the greenhouse gas consequences of these actions arefully considered. The guidance should also incorporate advice on handling the adaptability of transportproposals to climate change. This will ensure that as interventions come forward from scheme promoters(including local authorities), the climate change consequences are fully considered and resilient transportnetworks developed. It will also be important that these impacts are reflected in the transport prioritisationexercises for Regional Funding Allocations.

Investment

24. Carbon reduction criteria should be embedded into government funding streams to drive behaviouralchange. EEDA is already demonstrating how this can be achieved through our requirement that all capitalbuild projects we invest in strive to achieve the BREEAM Excellent standard (or equivalent).

25. The Government also needs to provide certainty in the funding it makes available. Climate changeis a long-term issue which will require sustained investment over the medium to long-term and consistency offunding. On 21 December, RDAs learned that Defra is unlikely to provide direct BREW (Business ResourceEYciency and Waste) funding to RDAs for the period 2008–11. This decision is disappointing. Historically,we used the funds to support six regional initiatives targeted at minimising business waste to landfill bylooking at converting waste into renewable energy, by reducing waste in the construction sector, byproviding environmental awareness training, by connecting businesses with community groups who mightbe able to use the waste products, by using a web-based materials exchange to swap waste and by increasingrecycling and re-use within the supply. Our plans, which were under development with partners, for thefuture of the programme were focused on achieving better alignment between these initiatives and deliveringan enhanced coherence across the East of England.


Skills

26. The Government should also consider providing additional investment in skills development. EEDAis working with partners to identify skills gaps and develop solutions as there is a significant lack of capacityin the emerging environmental sectors. Aspiration is not yet matched by the ability to deliver. TheGovernment should support the Sector Skills Councils to work with RDAs to develop swift and eVectivesolutions to this problem.


27. EEDA is clear about its role in tackling climate change and is working, through the RegionalEconomic Strategy and the regional Climate Change Action Plan, to bring clarity to the region on roles andresponsibilities. EEDA views its role as providing regional leadership on the economic dimensions of climatechange, both adaptation and mitigation, including the development of low carbon technology and services,driving forward investment in renewable energy and supporting the growth of the environmental goods andservices sector. We are working closely with partners to help them determine their role in relation to theclimate change agenda and to ensure there is regional/local and public/private sector cohesion. For example,EEDA is funding UKCEED to work on developing a carbon targeting and accounting methodology forlocal authorities that will enable them to better understand policy and strategy decisions and how they willimpact on carbon emissions. There is a real risk that, with the growth of the climate change agenda, withoutstrong regional leadership a lack of co-ordination and duplication will occur and that customer confusionwill reign due to the proliferation of funding streams and bodies.

28. EEDA views the current Regional Economic Strategy and, when it comes into eVect, its replacement,the new Single Regional Strategy, as important tools for driving clarity, co-ordinating action andmonitoring performance. Central government has an important role to play in making sure that this goalis achieved. It is currently developing its thinking around the new Single Regional Strategies and it needs toencourage all public sector bodies operating in the region, whether national, regional or local, to work todeliver the Strategy. By using this as the framework for the co-ordination of investments, it will help tomainstream the Government’s low carbon aspirations.

29. The regional Climate Change Action Plan will also be an important tool for co-ordinating action andEEDA is working with partners to ensure that it is aligned with the new Regional Economic Strategy whichwill come into eVect in 2008. It is important, in our opinion, that both of these documents havecomplementary aspirations and that they provide clarity to the regional picture rather than creatingconfusion.

30. In terms of monitoring and accountability, there needs to be recognition of existing monitoring andreporting requirements which local and regional bodies are subject to and an understanding that theseexisting requirements are likely to deliver evidence of the action being taken to deliver against the climatechange agenda.


31. EEDA welcomes the inclusion of climate change mitigation and adaptation indicators in the newPerformance Framework for Local Authorities and Local Authority Partnerships. Performance indicatorshave the potential to provide a real impetus for action at a local level, provided they are targeted at realdelivery and supported by clear advice from government on how emission savings should be calculated andreported.


32. EEDA believes that there should be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government, as theyare useful in highlighting the desire and need for activity. EEDA is therefore working to establish a carbonreduction target for the East of England for incorporation in to the new Regional Economic Strategy. Weare concerned, however, that central government may, once our target is in force, subsequently take adecision on regional/local targets that does not align with the regional target which has been established forthe East of England. We would ask central government to support any regional targets which have been


established in the absence of disaggregated national targets. If the Government intends to cascade nationaltargets to regional and local level, then we would ask that this be announced as soon as possible. Localauthorities should be encouraged to work to a disaggregation of the regional target and not be asked bycentral government to set local targets in isolation.

33. We would like to reiterate the point that central government needs to provide robust and back-calculated datasets, disaggregated to the regional/local level, to support this process.


34. The East of England is vulnerable to the eVects of climate change and we are therefore takingadaptation very seriously. The regional Climate Change Action Plan which is being developed for the Eastof England has a strong adaptation focus. Activity by partners will be co-ordinated through this Plan toensure increased resilience of the regional economy and natural environment to climate change, to reducegreenhouse gas emissions and to grow the economy sustainably in areas of opportunity created byclimate change.

35. Government has a role to play in helping regional and local action on adaptation by providing robustevidence which can be used to inform decisions and costings, by investing in adapatation and by helping todisseminate best practice. It is important that the UK Climate Impacts Programme continues to providerobust scenarios, including at regional level, and is funded to continue to provide up-to-date scientificexpertise in this rapidly developing area as this information is vital for planning and decision-making. TheGovernment should provide funds for investment in adaptation activity, especially climate-resilientinfrastructure and should remove policy barriers that prevent adaptation uptake. Whilst government has arole to play in the provision of an evidence base and dissemination of information, action on adaptation isbest decided and taken at local level. The Government should help to resource this action.

36. The proposed Local Area Agreement adaptation indicator will help to drive adaptation activity bylocal authorities if selected.


37. The RDAs stated in their response to the draft Climate Change Bill that the Committee shouldinclude regional representation to ensure that it provides advice to the Government which recognises thediversity of regions and the contribution that they can make to tackling climate change through fit-for-purpose policy. EEDA fully endorses this view. Although the Government responded that the Committeeshould consist of experts, not representative of stakeholder groups, EEDA is concerned that without anunderstanding of the intricacies of policy implementation and the regional/local agenda, the Committeecould provide government with advice which is diYcult to implement. The Committee must have amechanism for engaging with regional and local stakeholders, including RDAs. EEDA, as the lead RDAon climate change, would be happy to act as a representative for the RDAs in this matter.


38. EEDA is making a significant commitment to tackling climate change through both its regionalleadership and its in-house activity. Its partners are also stepping up to the mark and the region is pullingtogether to take action on climate change. There remain, however, barriers which need to be tacklednationally to facilitate regional/local delivery. Answers to previous questions identify some of the barriersto regional/local action in more detail, but this is EEDA’s headline list of barriers:

— There needs to be a clear and consistent policy and strategy framework for climate change withcarbon reduction mainstreamed nationally accompanied by appropriate enabling strategies. Thisin turn will filter through in to regional and local implementation.

— The Government’s climate change priorities need to be applied consistently across the breadth ofmainstream policy development.

— There needs to be common and robust evidence and intelligence which can be used in theformulation of national, regional and local policy and delivery.

— The Government needs to provide clarity on whether it intends to cascade national targets toregional and local level or whether it will accept and recognise the targets which have been set inthe absence of government targets. Uncertainty risks creating confusion and unaligned targets.

— There is a skills gap in all aspects of the emerging and growing environmental sector. TheGovernment needs to work with RDAs and Sector Skills Councils to identify and address thesegaps.


— The Government needs to recognise that cost is a major barrier, particularly for individuals, andtake steps to address this.

— The Government needs to remove the barriers currently holding back the rollout of decentralisedand renewable energy by altering the regulatory licence exemptions which limit the maximum sizeof electricity generation plants exempt from the burdens of a Supply Licence, adapting theregulatory and market structure for electricity to reflect the diVerent scale and economics ofdecentralised energy, providing more incentives for renewables and Combined Heat & Power.

— The Eastern region has a significant number of communities in fuel poverty that are oV the gasnetwork and in hard to treat homes reliant on oil heating. The Government needs to meet the needsof this group of people in addition to its focus on those who can aVord to pay for the installationof microgeneration equipment.

8. What impact will the new Planning Policy Statement on climate change have on emissions reductions andwork on adaptation? How are the so called “Merton rules aVected? How might other planning guidance bechanged to reduce emissions?

39. Planning has a crucial role to play in both eVectively insisting on measures to tackle climate changeand in allowing new low carbon endeavours and enterprises to be brought forward. The recent LocalGovernment Association (LGA) report on councils and climate change highlights planning as one of thefour areas in which local authorities can make a diVerence.

40. With activity lead by Renewables East and Inspire East, supported by EEDA, EERA, and the EST,over 30 events have been delivered during the last three years, providing training and support informationto local authorities planning oYcers, staV and councillors. This has led the region to enjoy an 83% approvalrate for renewable energy projects since 2003. However further work is required to ensure that knowledgeand understand of the issues remains high.

41. The East of England is planning to accommodate and encourage substantial housing and economicgrowth over the coming years. In recognising the complexities and pressures this puts on the drive to reduceregional carbon emissions the region submitted a “Merton” style policy into draft regional planningguidance. Although this has been commended by Yvette Cooper as an exemplar to all regions, its inclusionhas been called into question. The stakeholders in the region believe that it is vital to give development inthe region a requirement to address low carbon issues whilst ensuring a level playing field.

42. EEDA has yet to fully digest the new Planning Policy Statement which was only published onTuesday 18th December, but initial indications are that, whilst the Statement is to be broadly welcomed, ithas not gone far enough to support the creation of a level playing field in the regions and has introducedsome uncertainties.


43. EEDA is not in a position to comment on this question.


44. EEDA acts as the lead RDA on the climate change agenda, disseminating information and goodpractice across the RDAs, stimulating debate on vital issues and liaising with government departments. Wehave established a national cross-RDA group, which met frequently during 2007, to discuss issues anddevelop policy and practice linked to broad sustainable development, as well as more specific arenas aroundclimate change, resource eYciency, waste and energy. We have also created a monthly information bulletintargeted at RDAs and provide an online library of information for RDA colleagues. In addition, EEDA hasled the production of three good practice publications, “Tackling Climate Change in the Regions”, “SmartProductivity” and “Smart Growth” which have been disseminated widely to partners and stakeholders.

45. EEDA firmly believes in the need to share information at regional/local level to avoid duplication ofeVort, learn from good practice and strengthen relationships. EEDA directly participates in a wide rangeof regional partnerships, including jointly with Go East and EERA, Renewables East and Inspire East.EEDA also sits on a number of strategic steering groups (eg GO East Low Carbon Aspiration Group), aswell as being an active participant in the Sustainable Development Roundtable and the East of EnglandEnvironment Forum.

46. As well as EEDA’s own Sustainable and Rural Development Team, we host Regional Managers fromenvironmental organisations such as Carbon Trust, Envirowise, WRAP, the Biodiversity Forum and theregional Climate Change Partnership to ensure broader coherence when delivering advice. We are alsoinvesting in a regional Waterwise Manager. Through regular team meetings, EEDA staV and our hostedpartners share good practice and knowledge.


47. Last year the Regional Assembly conducted a review of the region’s activities in tackling climatechange and found significant activity being delivered throughout the region through organisations such asRenewables East.

2 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by Groundwork UK

About Groundwork UK

1. Groundwork is a federation of Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, each working withtheir partners to improve the quality of the local environment, the lives of local people and the success oflocal businesses in areas in need of investment and support. Groundwork’s projects aim to deliver benefits:

— for people—creating opportunities for people to learn new skills and become more active citizens;

— for places—delivering environmental improvements that create cleaner, safer and greenerneighbourhoods; and

— for prosperity—helping businesses and individuals fulfil their potential.

2. Groundwork’s vision is of a society made up of sustainable communities which are vibrant, healthyand safe, which respect the local and global environment and where individuals and enterprise prosper. Ouractivities are delivered through programmes which have been developed and delivered in partnership witha wide variety of organisations from the public, private and voluntary sectors.

3. Groundwork part sponsored a report published by Green Alliance in August 2007, which examinesthe role of local government in responding to climate change. In addition, Tony Hawkhead, Chief Executiveof Groundwork UK, is a member of the Local Government Association (LGA) Climate ChangeCommission, which published its final report in December 2007.

Summary of Submission

4. As an organisation with over a quarter of a century’s expertise in working closely with communitiesand in creating and maintaining green spaces, Groundwork believes that the UK will not meet its targets intackling climate change unless greater emphasis is placed on the behaviours of individuals and communities,in addition to the importance of the green infrastructure of our local areas. As such, we believe that the roleof partnerships between local authorities (LAs) and the public, private and voluntary sectors in this respectare crucial. Whilst we believe that many councils have demonstrated good practice, we feel that more needsto be done, both in terms of local government action and by central government in facilitating a frameworkto encourage, set targets for and measure climate change initiatives. Proposals for a new sub-nationaleconomic development and regeneration structure, new planning guidance and the new draft localgovernment performance framework all oVer a number of opportunities for encouraging and building onexisting climate change action, in addition to greater co-ordination across local and regional government.Groundwork believes that all must complement each other for the UK to meet its climate change targets.

The Role of the Third Sector in Tackling Climate Change

5. As Defra states,3 over 40% of UK carbon emissions are attributable to decisions made by individuals,either in their home or through their domestic travel decisions. As such, Groundwork believes that the UK’scontribution to the mitigation of the impacts of climate change will fail unless action is taken by individualsat a local level. Whilst LAs and regional bodies will play an important role in determining whether the UKreduces its carbon dioxide emissions to sustainable levels, other partners from the private and third sectorswill play an equal, if not greater role, in mobilising local action on climate change.

6. The voluntary sector has much to contribute: its experience in engaging with individuals andcommunities, both in terms of delivering services to them and understanding their needs and views, hasaVorded it a unique position. Its detachment from the public sector means that it can deliver services tocommunities on behalf of the state, which otherwise may not be responsive to initiatives delivered directlyby government. For the same reason, it can, equally, play a unique advocacy role in communities,campaigning for behaviour change and oVering support and advice.

7. Groundwork in particular is playing an important role in tackling climate change at a community level,by encouraging adults and children to change their behaviour by helping them understand and appreciatehow actions by individuals can make a real diVerence to the global environment. In schools, we support andtrain teachers to deliver education for sustainable development and help children learn about theirresponsibilities to the environment, for example by involving them in improving the environmental

3 Defra, 2007. [WWW] http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/climatechange/uk/individual/actonco2/index.htm.


performance of their school buildings and grounds. We also help businesses, public bodies (including LAs)and voluntary organisations to reduce their carbon footprint by providing Environmental ManagementServices, by improving their energy and resource eYciency and reducing waste.

8. In terms of mitigation, we are currently a delivery partner in Defra’s Every Action Counts programme,through which we are recruiting one hundred community champions to act as local advocates and help raiseawareness of and tackle climate change issues. We are also delivering the BS8555 environmental standardto ten organisations in the Every Actions Counts consortium.

9. Groundwork is also managing the Future Footprints programme, which will work with young peopleaged 16 to 25 years, equipping them with the skills and knowledge to become advocates for action on climatechange. Future Footprints is supported by v, the youth volunteering charity and the HBOS Foundation.Each Future Footprints project has received £40,000 to enable it to carry out its work with young people,one of the hardest demographic groups to engage through local government initiatives.

10. The green spaces which Groundwork has developed and maintained for over a quarter of a century,including parks, woodlands, gardens and allotments, have played and will continue to play an importantmitigation role in terms of absorbing and storing local carbon dioxide emissions. They will also play a rolein adapting to the impact of the changing climate in urban areas by absorbing rainwater and providingshelter from wind, in addition to oVering shade and cooling eVects during warm weather.

11. An excellent example of this is the Northwich Community Woodland & Mersey Forest. Created fromwhat was once largely derelict land as part of a project in which Groundwork was a partner, the Woodlandis made up of nine countryside sites located to the north of Northwich town centre in Cheshire. TheWoodlands have a significant impact on Northwich’s eVorts in tackling climate change. In terms ofadaptation, the green spaces intercept, store and infiltrate rainwater, reducing runoV into the rivers Weaverand Dane, both of which run through the town. Whilst both rivers do flood and may do so more regularlywith the onset of climate change, without spaces such as the Northwich Community Woodlands, theproblem would be much more pronounced within the local area. In terms of mitigation, the wooded areas,which consist of over 100,000 trees planted over approximately 50 Hectares, play an important role inabsorbing carbon dioxide emitted in and around the town centre. They also have a positive impact on thelocal climate through evaporative cooling. The development of a Vale Royal Greenways Strategy and the3km of greenways, including the installation of new bridges, were included in the project with the aim ofcreating better and more sustainable transport links between the town and countryside.

Local Authority and Regional Government Action on Climate Change

12. Green Alliance identifies three main areas through which LAs can take action to mitigate and adaptto climate change. These are through the management of their own estates, through the provision of servicesand through community leadership and place shaping.4

13. Groundwork does not, however, believe that the current framework overseen by Government forfacilitating action on climate change at a local level is suYcient. This is reinforced by Green Alliance’ssuggestion that local action has tended to be led by wilful individuals with “vision and determination”5

and not by the current mix of “carrots and sticks”.

14. We cite the example of the Home Energy Conservation Act (1995) (HECA), which the Governmentis proposing to repeal and which is currently the subject of a Defra consultation. The Act has required allLAs with housing responsibilities to develop plans to voluntarily improve energy eYciency by 30% between1996 and 2006, which they are obligated to report on annually, a task to which LAs currently allocatevarying levels of resource. Whilst this has facilitated the creation of capacity for climate change action withincouncils, many LAs see the legislation simply as a burden and not as a platform for further action.

15. Another area requiring attention is the management of green spaces. Green Spaces are essential inmitigating against climate change and provide important environmental benefits to local communities.However there are challenges in how we maintain this green infrastructure and local authorities need to takea leading role to address these. As Groundwork have recognised in a recent policy paper on this issue,6

LAs need to consider future revenue requirements for green spaces as part of mainstream budget-settingexercises and in the context of LAAs. Those leading grant-based approaches must also build revenue intobids and submissions. We feel that the key to achieving this is to capture and articulate the widerenvironmental benefits achieved through maintaining high quality and accessible green infrastructure.

16. We bring the EAC’s attention to Milton Keynes Park as a successful example of this. Although thedevelopment of the park was funded by the Milton Keynes Development Corporation, it is actually ownedand managed by a separate trust, with maintenance costs covered by an endowment, consisting of a number

4 Carty, T & Hislop, H, 2007. Changing Places: Advancing Local Government Action on Climate Change, p 7.5 Carty, T & Hislop, H, 2007. Changing Places: Advancing Local Government Action on Climate Change, p 8.6 Wigmore, J and Duxbury, G, 2006. Sustaining green space investment—issues, challenges and recommendations.


of properties within the park. This ensures that, as an important green space within an urban community,the park is financially sustainable and not an excessive burden on the public purse. It also means that it is wellplaced to continue to oVer climate change mitigation and adaptation benefits to those who live in its vicinity.

The Role of Local and Regional Strategies

17. Groundwork strongly believes that tackling climate change must become a key element in allstrategies produced at regional and local levels. This specifically includes Regional Economic Strategies(RES) and Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS), or the single regional strategy that would encompass bothRESs and RSSs, as proposed by the Government as part of the review of sub-national economicdevelopment and regeneration. As Green Alliance7 suggests, regional action on climate change could beco-ordinated and significantly strengthened through the development of Multi Area Agreements on climatechange between LAs. We echo the call of the LGA Climate Change Commission8 for the duty of co-operation to be extended to MAAs.

18. At a local level, we also believe that mitigation and adaptation to climate change must become a keyelement of Sustainable Community Strategies, Local Area Agreements (LAAs), Local DevelopmentFrameworks (LDFs), Local Transport Plans (LTPs), asset management strategies and any othersupplementary strategies and duties for LAs which concern economic and sustainable development andlocal energy use, such as the new economic development duty.

19. We call for all strategies regarding economic development, planning, the environment, energy andtransport at local and regional levels to consider their impact upon greenhouse gas emissions and to outlinemeasures for tackling climate change in the areas they concern. All strategies must complement each otherand work together towards achieving the same local and/or regional climate change objectives.

Local Government Performance Framework

20. Groundwork believes that there must be explicit reference to tackling climate change in the finalpublished set of national indicators for LAs and local authority partnerships. We support the introductionof N185 (CO2 reduction from Local Authority operations), N186 (Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions inthe LA area) and N188 (Adapting to Climate Change), although we are disappointed that they do notstipulate quantitative levels of CO2 emissions reduction, either from local authority estates or actions, orfrom within their geographical areas as a whole. We are also disappointed that a set target of CO2 emissionsreductions has not been stipulated as an outcome from action facilitated by LAAs. Whilst, overall,Groundwork believes that the new indicators represent a positive step, more could be done to stimulateaction on climate change at a local level.

21. We believe that the proposed Comprehensive Area Assessment will oVer the best mechanism forassessing the performance, accountability and transparency of LAs and partnerships in tackling climatechange.


22. As the LGA Climate Change Commission9 highlights, the Nottingham Declaration has played auseful role in terms of highlighting the importance of climate change and mobilising an initial reaction fromlocal government. We support the view, however, that it is flawed due to the lack of any monitoring inrelation to local action resulting from the Declaration.

Barriers to Local Government Climate Change Powers

23. Groundwork highlights the recommendations made by the LGA Climate Change Commission,which proposes that councils are allowed to fast-track proposals for carbon reduction within their localdevelopment frameworks. We also support calls made in the report for CLG to address technical and legalbarriers which are currently hindering the ability of LAs to enable the wide-scale adoption of council taxincentives for energy eYcient homes, in addition to those which request an extension of the capacity of localcouncils to hold public bodies to account for their response to climate change within their local area.

24. In terms of LA resources, we cite the Commission’s report, which states that one of the biggestbarriers to local government action on climate change is a lack of capacity. 86% of councils have identifiedinsuYcient staV and staV time to tackle climate change as a significant obstacle to action. It continues bysuggesting that skills shortages in local government in key disciplines, including energy management.

7 Carty, T & Hislop, H, 2007. Changing Places: Advancing Local Government Action on Climate Change, p 27.8 LGA Climate Change Commission, 2007. A Climate of Change: Final Report of the LGA Climate Change Commission, p 20.9 LGA Climate Change Commission, 2007. A Climate of Change: Final Report of the LGA Climate Change Commission, p 19.


Local Government Powers on Climate Change

25. We believe that, at the present time, LAs are not utilising all of the powers they have at their disposalto mitigate and adapt to climate change within their areas. For example, Groundwork draws the EAC’sattention to the “well-being” power, as set out in the Local Government Act (2000), which, according toGreen Alliance, “gives LAs considerable scope for action on sustainable development, including climatechange policies”.10 We also highlight the ability of LAs to charge, trade and borrow prudentially,11 whichwe believe gives them the potential to generate further resources for action on climate change.

26. Groundwork believes that councils have a critical role to play in terms of providing leadership ontackling climate change at a community level. They should set examples in terms of their own environmentalperformance and should fully implement the authority which they have at their disposal to ensure that theirlocal areas reduce carbon emissions, become more energy eYcient and preserve and develop green spaces.

The Planning Process

27. Groundwork believes that the planning process has a vital role to play in tackling climate change. Itmust facilitate a system whereby communities can take steps to mitigate and adapt to it more easily. We feelthat new developments must also play a central role in building and sustaining socially cohesive communitieswith appropriate community infrastructure, so as to avoid social exclusion and adverse environmentalimpacts that could arise as a result of likely changes to the climate. New sites should also take into accountthe important role that green space plays in adapting and mitigating to climate change, specifically in termsof evaporative cooling, shading from sun and wind, absorbing carbon dioxide and, particularly in floodplainareas, reducing surface runoV into local watercourses.

28. As such, Groundwork welcomes the recent publication of the new supplement to Planning PolicyStatement (PPS) 1 on climate change. We endorse its intention to ensure that new developments are plannedto limit carbon dioxide emissions, take advantage of low carbon and decentralised energy and minimisefuture vulnerability to a changing climate. We also welcome its intention to help existing developments toincorporate renewable or low carbon energy, in addition to the obligation on planning authorities to takeaccount of the contribution to be made from open space and green infrastructure to urban cooling,sustainable drainage systems and the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity.

29. We welcome the pledge to retain and apply the “Merton Rule” across all LAs in the PPS1 supplement.We believe that it has had an important impact in terms of encouraging on-site energy generation andimprovements in the resource eYciency and carbon emissions of new developments. Groundwork endorsesthe PPS’s intention to ensure that the system facilitates communities that are fit for future climates andprovide public, open and green space in new development to provide for flood storage.

30. We believe that it is particularly important that the performance of the new PPS is measured in termsof the carbon emissions and overall sustainability of new developments.

Best Practice

31. Groundwork believes that there are a number of examples of best practice whereby LAs are playingan important role in both mitigating and adapting to climate change. We highlight the important role beingplayed by the Beacons Scheme in recognising and showcasing best practice in local government. Beaconstatus is granted to those authorities that can demonstrate a clear vision, excellent services and a willingnessto innovate within a theme. Groundwork is a silver sponsor of the round 9 Tackling Climate Change theme.

32. Whilst Groundwork believes that best practice has an important role to play in informing local andregional action on climate change, we warn against the application of a “one size fits all approach” to thelocal government response. Tackling climate change relies on action by communities and individuals; assuch, they should be allowed the autonomy to decide on the most appropriate actions for their own localareas.

3 January 2008

10 Carty, T & Hislop, H, 2007. Changing Places: Advancing Local Government Action on Climate Change, p 10.11 LGA Climate Change Commission, 2007. A Climate of Change: Final Report of the LGA Climate Change Commission, p 21.


Memorandum submitted by WWF

Introduction

WWF considers tackling climate change to be a key role of all levels of government. We believe that thekey themes that need to be addressed to enable greater and more coherent action at the sub-national levelto be:

1. ensuring that sub-national government has the powers to take leadership on climate change;

2. developing and using reliable tools so that interventions can be strategic and their eVectivenessmonitored; and

3. enabling lower carbon lifestyle changes.

These themes are explored by WWF’s responses to questions raised by the committee below.


Central government needs to empower local, regional and devolved government to take a strongleadership role on climate change. Local authorities in particular need to receive a clear message from theUK and devolved administrations that they will be expected to contribute to greenhouse gas emissionsreductions, in line (or exceeding) national targets. WWF suspects that the powers for sub-nationalgovernment to take leadership and act on climate change are already in place, but we would like to see ananalysis of existing powers take place to identify where new powers might be required. On the basis of thisanalysis, we would like to see national government to pro-actively encourage devolved, regional and localgovernment.

This message could be given with a coherent programme of performance measures, targets, financing, andaccountability through audit. Audit and annual performance measures should specifically include referenceto emission reduction plans in local authority operations and the local authority community or area.

A key obstacle to action at present is the confusing messages sent by government about priorities. Forexample, the recent WWF, FoE, CPRE report “How Green is My Region”12 concluded that Governmentconsistently sends confusing messages to Regions with conflicting policy requirements. This is mostobviously seen in the conflict between the support by central government for regional airport expansion withthe expectation to reduce climate change emissions. A wider concern is the government’s over-riding focuson economic development leading to making action on climate change almost impossible. Similarconflicting priorities are sent by government to local authorities too.

A key barrier for action at the regional level could be the proposed reorganization of regional governmentstructures. WWF is concerned that the emphasis on an economic development duty will dominate theagenda and side line attempts to implement sustainable development objectives. Government must beconsistent and clear in its requirements of the regions and local authorities.

Despite the confusing messages from government about the priority of climate change action at subnational level, some beacons of leadership are emerging. The role of the London Mayor in developing avision for a low carbon London is an excellent example. The pioneering work of Woking Borough Councilalso demonstrates that local authorities can take real action that can have an impact. These initiatives needto be joined up and some form of annual national-local summit of political leaders to assess the regional andlocal authority contribution to national targets would be useful. It would provide the necessary leadership,political steer, and regular evaluation of opportunities and challenges to meeting targets year on year. Itmight also create a shift in attitude in government at all levels, resulting in the proper prioritization of climatechange at the sub national level.


The “How Green is My Region” report highlights confusion over the roles of the diVerent levels ofgovernment in England. These roles need to be clarified and made more explicit. Without this,accountability, transparency, and comparability in the monitoring of emissions specifically and climatechange adaptation and mitigation generally, will remain problematic.

12 WWF, CPRE, FoE (July 2007) How Green is My Region.


The Nottingham Declaration has provided a useful start for some local authorities. In Scotland, theScottish Climate Change Declaration (with 100% of Scottish local authorities signed up) has similarcommitments in terms of taking action on emissions. Now is the time to raise the bar by requiring localauthorities and regions to report on emissions based on their operations and also those based on theconsumption of their area in line with national targets. To date, most local authorities have focused onreducing the carbon dioxide emissions of their estate and related operations. Yet whereas an average councilproduces at least 30,000 tonnes of carbon per annum,13 an average local authority area in the UK has aCarbon Footprint totaling over one and half million tonnes.14 Action on mitigating climate change in thecommunity is therefore vital.

Defra’s proposed community emissions indicator provides an incentive for local authorities to engagewith their communities on carbon emissions reductions. The Carbon Footprint is a complementary indicatorwhich provides in-depth information for local authorities to enable focus on influencing the behaviour of localresidents. The Carbon Footprint provides a lifestyle focus and an area focus; it measures the carbon dioxideemissions associated with energy use, travel, food consumption and spending on goods and services in alocal authority area.

Local authorities will need support in setting meaningful local improvement targets and devising an approachto meeting them. One way of doing this is through the REAP software tool. REAP generated CarbonFootprint (and Ecological Footprint) data provides complementary in-depth information for localauthorities to use a community emissions indicator and focus on influencing the behaviour of local residents.Further explanation on the Carbon Footprint, and identification of the key policy levers which connect withits use, is available in “The Right Climate for Change”.15


The new performance framework does encourage local authorities to focus on the carbon dioxideemissions in their geographic area. WWF would encourage all local authorities to use the carbon footprintindictor because it takes account of carbon emissions embedded in any goods or service, but were generatedoutside of the geographical area.

WWF considers that when embedded emissions are considered, a strong imperative is placed in workingon those sectors that have the highest overall emissions. From a local authority context, the key sectors inwhich they could have an impact on reducing emissions are: housing, transport and waste. While sustainabledevelopment and climate change imperatives are increasingly being considered in the development ofstrategies for these sectors, the conflicting messages from government highlighted under question 1) oftenresult in strategies for these sectors adding to carbon emissions rather than reducing them. Again, clearmessaging and an encouragement from government for local authorities to take bold decisions in policydevelopment could result in significant impacts on our carbon footprint.

Local authorities can also be eVective through using the planning system. WWF’s response to the PPS onPlanning and Climate Change provides detail on how WWF considers planning can be used to reducecarbon footprint.


WWF considers climate change to be a global issue that requires coordinated action at all levels. Webelieve that targets should be set at a national level and each level of government should be tasked to takeaction where its role and powers are best fitted to do so. WWF would also encourage and support devolved,regional and local government to set their own targets where they consider they can have a bigger impactthan national targets.

However, regions and local authorities are hamstrung by government stating that they cannot go beyondcentral government policy. So, those regions that want to set very stringent targets for sustainableconstruction, for example, may find that their bold policies will be removed by government because they gobeyond current expectations.

13 LGA Climate Change Commission, 2007 (Strengthening local action on climate change).14 SEI/WWF 2007.15 Visit www.wwflearning.org.uk/localmatters. Published October 2007.



WWF supports the focus on climate change adaptation in the UK. There are many initiatives taking placeand we await the results of these with interest. But, WWF considers that climate change adaptation shouldalso be about adapting lifestyles, Local authorities could have a crucial role in enabling lifestyle change boththrough the eVective development and implementation of policy and acting in a leadership and enabling rolewith local communities.


EVective governance for climate change at all levels is one of the key mechanisms for achieving climatechange mitigation and adaptation. WWF examined the competencies identified for this committee andconsidered that governance processes were not included. The committee must have someone with a strongcompetency on governance on its panel.


The issues set out in question 1 give detail on the barriers and our recommendation of an analysis ofpowers would help to determine if more powers are required.

WWF considers that because climate change action requires coordination at many levels, local authoritiesshould be encouraged to take joint action with their neighbours. Devolved and regional government couldhave a vital role in facilitating this.


WWF’s response to the PPS: Planning and Climate Change is appended for information.16


This is not an area that we have detailed evidence on, but others argue that local authorities do not havesuYcient resources to enforce building regulations.


The above organisations have a crucial role to play in sharing best practice and provding case studies.Addtionally, consideration should be given to sharing how leaderhip for change has been achieved. Manyof the obstacles faced by local authorities seem to be at the stages before anything happens, so any workthat can be done to help share “how” change was achieved as well as the detail of the change would buildmomentum.

The Carbon Footprint of Local Authority Areas

Background and key messages

To date, most local authorities have focused on reducing the carbon dioxide emissions of their estate andrelated operations. Yet whereas an average council produces at least 30,000 tonnes of carbon per annum,17

an average local authority area in England has a Carbon Footprint totalling over 1.5 million tonnes.18

Action on mitigating climate change in the community is therefore vital.

Defra’s proposed community emissions indicator provides an incentive for local authorities to engagewith their communities on carbon emissions reductions. The Carbon Footprint is a complementary indicatorwhich provides in-depth information for local authorities that want to focus on influencing the behaviour of local

16 Not printed.17 LGA Climate Change Commission, 2007 (Strengthening local action on climate change).18 SEI/WWF 2007.


residents. The Carbon Footprint provides a lifestyle focus and an area focus; it measures the carbon dioxideemissions associated with energy use, travel behaviour, food consumption and spending on goods andservices in a local authority area (see overleaf).

— WWF-UK and SEI urge the LGA Climate Change Commission to recognise the value and roleof the Carbon Footprint in helping to address climate change at a local level. We would welcomediscussions on the development of allied policy levers to encourage and support action by localauthorities on reducing the carbon emissions of their communities.

At the time of writing a central reporting approach is suggested for the community emissions indicatorbased on Defra’s experimental local authority emissions data.19 The rationale for this approach is that itreduces the local authority reporting burden. But local authorities will need support in setting meaningful localimprovement targets and devising an approach to meeting them. One way of doing this is through the REAPsoftware tool. REAP generated Carbon Footprint data provides complementary in-depth information forlocal authorities that want to use a community emissions indicator and focus on influencing the behaviourof local residents.

— WWF-UK and SEI would welcome the opportunity to explore how this tool might be developedto increase its reach and accessibility.

Carbon Footprint data generated by the REAP software tool will soon be available for free for every localauthority area in the UK.20 The REAP software tool can be used to identify how local policies may eVectcarbon dioxide emissions from the local community over time.

An explanation of the Carbon Footprint, and identification of the key policy levers which connect withits use, will also soon be available in a new publication from WWF-UK and SEI, “The Right Climate forChange”.21

Understanding the Carbon Footprint

The Carbon Footprint is a measure of the total amount of carbon dioxide emissions that are directly andindirectly caused by human activity. In their forthcoming publication, WWF and SEI use the CarbonFootprint to look at the consumption activities of individuals and households within local authority areas.This provides us with a connection between the way people live, the policy levers available to localgovernment and climate change. The Carbon Footprint is:

Outcome based: It helps local authorities to decide how they wish to allocate resources and deliveragainst their targets. Local authorities that use REAP can test how diVerent combinations ofpolicies could deliver reductions in the Carbon Footprint as well as whether consumer trends maycreate risks.

Attributable to local authority action: The Carbon Footprint results reflect the geography of localauthority areas and the characteristics of the local population, as well as local and national levelpolicies implemented at that time. REAP can be used to take account of trends and changes drivenby local and national government collectively or separately. The expected and actual impact ofindividual policy measures can be measured in isolation to other changes, and to create best andworst case scenarios. SEI has used REAP to create transport projections for Hertfordshire CountyCouncil and Greater Nottingham based on local policies, national trends in travel behavior, andprojected improvements in the fuel eYciency of vehicles.

A driver of behaviour change: The Carbon Footprint can be directly related to behaviour change inall areas of people’s lifestyle and on an individual, household and community basis. AberdeenshireCounty Council is using REAP to create Footprint profiles of local communities.

Aligned to other policy objectives and statutory duties: The scope of the Carbon Footprint makesit possible to link climate change to a number of other local agendas including access to services,planning decisions, health, fuel poverty, housing conditions, and waste management.

Measurable in a cost eVective fashion: The online Carbon Footprint data creates no additionalreporting requirement. However, to update this data with local sources and monitor changes inresidents’ behaviour using REAP requires dedicated resource within your local authority area.York, North Lanarkshire, Aberdeenshire and Aberdeen all have dedicated Footprint OYcers whochampion Footprint Analysis and build expertise within their local authorities.

Comparable over time and between local authorities: The online Carbon Footprint data provides asound comparison of carbon dioxide emissions between diVerent local authority areas. Data setsare regionally adjusted so comparisons are likely to be most reasonable within Government OYce

19 http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/localgovindicators/pdf/Indicators/CO2.pdf20 Further information on REAP can be found in the accompanying briefing, “An introduction to the Resources and Energy

Analysis Program”. The REAP software tool comes with a licence charge and users require training. At present the onlinedata is available for free—visit www.sei.se/reap/

21 Visit www.wwflearning.org.uk/localmatters. Publication due out late October 2007.


Regions. The online data will be updated on an annual basis; REAP users can also update theirbaseline using locally specific information but this takes away the direct comparability at anational or regional level.

Auditable: The Carbon Footprint data available online requires no input from local authoritiesand data collection and analysis is carried out by SEI. REAP technical reports outline themethodological approach and all data sets are provided by Government departments, the OYcefor National Statistics or CACI’s Acorn socio-economic local authority profiles. SEI is developingsupport material and recommended data sources for local authorities that want to update theirCarbon Footprint using REAP.

Collaborative: The range of issues the Carbon Footprint touches on encourages partnershipworking within and between local authorities and community partners. SEI is investigating thepotential for an online forum for users of the Carbon Footprint data to share best practice andlessons learned. In the Tees Valley SEI worked with the Environment Agency and Hartlepool,Darlington, Middleborough, Redcar and Cleveland and Stockon on Tees Unitary Authorities tolook at housing and transport issues across the sub-region. A REAP license is now held by the TeesValley Joint Strategy Unit with the aim of supporting all five local authorities.

WWF Response to Planning Policy Statement: Planning and Climate Change, supplement to PPS1

1. Introduction

WWF welcomes the opportunity to comment on the above consultation, and the complementary Buildinga Greener Future and Water EYciency in New Buildings consultations. WWF launched its One MillionSustainable Homes campaign five years ago, and at the outset we initiated a nine-month stakeholderdialogue to identify the barriers to the mainstreaming of sustainable homes in the UK. WWF consulted witha wide range of stakeholders, including a large number of developers and planners. One of the key barriersconsistently identified by stakeholders was the planning system at the national, regional and local levels. Wetherefore believe that this supplement to PPS1 will be vital in helping to deliver clear guidance on climatechange issues in spatial planning and the built environment and we urge the Government to make clear thatthis policy will be fundamentally embedded at the heart of the Planning system.

WWF believes that it is vital that all decisions on housing growth are taken within the context and fullknowledge of local and global environmental limits. Our homes not only have significant directenvironmental impacts, they also aVect our lifestyle decisions such as how we travel to work and where webuy our food. It is therefore absolutely essential that new homes are developed to the highest buildingstandards and with the necessary infrastructure to enable residents to easily choose the sustainable optionand reduce the impacts of their lifestyles. The alternative is to risk locking residents into high carbon, car-dependent lifestyles for generations to come.

2. Carbon trajectories

We welcome the proposed introduction of regional trajectories for carbon emissions. We believe thattrajectories should be required of regional authorities and not simply encouraged, and that they should betranslated into regional and local planning policy as soon as is practicable.

We firmly believe that these trajectories should be based on a robust methodology which incorporates thetotal global emissions resulting from a region’s activities. A methodology should be adopted that takesaccount of emissions in other countries that result from our consumption of imported goods, resources andservices. Our consumption patterns here are driving CO2 emissions in many developing countries—this isknown as “burden shifting”. Research suggests that a typical region might have to account for a further10–15% more CO2 emissions if we are to take full responsibility for our consumption patterns.

WWF recommends the use of the latest evidence based models/tools to develop policy scenarios andassess the overall trajectory of policies. WWF has been involved in the development of such a tool, theResource Energy Analysis Programme (REAP).

Designed by Stockholm Environment Institute with the Centre for Urban and Regional Ecology andWWF, REAP models the impacts of policy and creates scenarios of the future trajectory. These scenarioscan be compared against targets or alternative policy outcomes based on modelled trends or assumptions.For example for housing policy it is possible to explore the impact of introducing policies that reduce energyuse, reduce emissions and promote the development of renewable energy sources. The impact can beexpressed in carbon dioxide emissions22 or by using the Ecological Footprint.

22 REAP can be used to calculate all greenhouse gases associated with our consumption activities, including carbon dioxide(CO2), methane and nitrous oxide.


REAP was launched in March 2006 and is available to every region in England through the SustainableConsumption and Production network (SCPnet).23 Training on use of REAP is being provided to regionsvia the SCPnet and all the data used in REAP is available for download via the Ecological Budget website.24

REAP has recently been used by a number of regions and local authorities to assess the overall direction ortrajectory that key policies will lead to in terms of CO2 emissions.25

3. Energy supply

WWF believes that 10% onsite renewable energy generation for new developments should be regarded asan absolute minimum standard, and that Regional Planning Bodies (RPBs) and Local Planning Authorities(LPAs) who wish to require more should be allowed and encouraged to do so. WWF also supports, inprinciple, the development of new and additional oVsite renewable capacity by the developer, depending onthe opportunities/limitations of the site. WWF suggests that one way of ensuring “additionality” would befor developers to pay to retire the Renewables Obligation Certificates associated with the renewableelectricity generation for a fixed period.

WWF believes that higher levels of energy eYciency and renewable energy and low/zero carbon heat andpower could be delivered by a shift to Energy Service Companies (ESCos). There are already a number ofESCos that have been set up to facilitate the delivery of very low carbon heat and power, ranging from theIsland of Gigha Heritage Trust to Mill Energy Services at Titanic Mill. These first generation ESCos haveprovided valuable experience about the barriers to Energy Services which include high start up costs, andthe time required to set up the ESCo. If these barriers can be overcome then a second generation of ESCos,possibly following the multi-utility model being proposed by Thames Water and EDF Energy at Ebbsfleet,will come online. The Government should also support and incentivise the development of SustainableUtility Service Companies “SUScos” to deliver “joined-up”, and therefore more cost-eVective, sustainablewaste, water and energy infrastructure in new and existing developments.

WWF believes that a transformation of the current Energy EYciency Commitment into a supplier capand trade scheme has the potential to revolutionise the delivery of energy eYciency and renewable energy.Placing a progressively tighter cap on total gas and electricity supply would force supply companies toembrace a new business model based on provision of energy services. Previous eVorts to promote ESCoshave been hampered by the fact that the existing market structure and regulation is based around provisionof energy as a commodity.26 By shifting to a supplier cap and trade system, the Government wouldencourage both developers and energy companies to develop new models of energy delivery.

4. Local flexibility for higher building standards

As stated above, WWF welcomes the introduction of the Code for Sustainable Homes and the targets forfuture minimum standards in the Building Regulations and the commitment to zero carbon by 2016.However, WWF firmly believes that RBPs and LPAs that wish to demand higher standards more quicklyshould be allowed the flexibility to do so. We support the point in 1.13 that LPAs are encouraged to “engageconstructively and imaginatively with developers to secure the delivery of sustainable buildings and recognisesthere will be local circumstances that justify higher standards for particular developments . . . for example,where there is significant local opportunity for major development to be delivered at higher levels of the Codefor Sustainable Homes”.

Given that approximately 2 million homes will be built between now and 2016, WWF believes that RPBsand LPAs must be allowed and positively encouraged to require higher standards, using the Code forSustainable Homes. Currently guidance on this is confusing and frequently the Examination in Public (EiP)process curbs best practice in this area. In turn, developers should receive clear information about thestandards they will be required to meet in pre-application discussions so that they can deliver innovativesolutions in the most cost-eVective way. Experience has shown time and time again (for example throughEnglish Partnership development schemes) that developers are more than able to rise to the challenge ofmeeting higher sustainability standards, as long as they are clear on requirements from the outset.

5. Wider sustainable Infrastructure provision

WWF warmly welcomed the announcements made in December that all new homes would be zero carbonby 2016 through the Building Regulations. However, the Planning system has a critical role to play indelivering against the broader “site level” aspects of mitigating and adapting to climate change. For thisreason we support the points set in paragraph 35 but would add:

— Excellent public transport links, the consideration of car clubs and a ‘green transport plan’ toreduce personal car use.

23 www.scpnet.org.uk24 www.ecologicalbudget.org.uk25 Using REAP for an environmental assessment of the Leeds City Region RSS Housing Policy and Carbon Dioxide Emissions of

West Midlands Housing A Scenario Analysis, http://www.sei.se/reap/regional/r casestudies.php26 WWF-UK Response to the Energy Review.


— Access to local, “walkable” amenities including schools, health and leisure facilities, localemployment opportunities and oYce space, local food links and farmers markets.

— Facilities to enable easy home-working.

— Green spaces to help absorb heat, and provide amenity value for residents, and space forbiodiversity.

WWF and BioRegional’s work on “One Planet Living”27 (OPL) aims to make it easy, aVordable andattractive for people to live within their “fair share” of the earth’s resources. We are working with partnersin the UK (including in the Thames Gateway) and internationally to develop a network of zero carbon, OnePlanet Living communities to demonstrate OPL in action.

Three proposed zero carbon developments in Middlesbrough, London and Brighton will contain thefeatures listed above and will be developed competitively within standard developer commercial parameters.Furthermore, faster sales rates are expected to increase profitability. More details on how the above elementscan be incorporated into new developments can be found in the BioRegional report, Enabling One PlanetLiving in the Thames Gateway.28

To facilitate a good dialogue on sustainability issues between planners and developers, WWF and BRE,with part DCLG funding, have developed Regional Sustainability Checklists29 in the English regions. Thechecklists set out a common framework of issues to be considered at the pre-planning and planning stage.WWF firmly believes that in order to ensure that the wider sustainability aspects of developments which arenot addressed under the Code for Sustainable Homes, such as transport, community participation indecision making, community infrastructure and business development opportunities, the Governmentshould also require and support the use of the DCLG/WWF/BRE Regional Sustainability Checklists forDevelopment. With part funding from DCLG, WWF has been working with BRE and a range of regionalstakeholders to develop the Checklists, using the existing SE version developed by BRE and SEEDA as amodel, but tailoring each one to regional concerns and policy. The Checklists will be completed andavailable free of charge by Spring 2007.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Energy Retail Association

About the Energy Retail Association

1. The Energy Retail Association (ERA), formed in 2003, represents Britain’s electricity and gas suppliersin the domestic market in Great Britain. The ERA works closely with Government, NGOs, charities andother organisations in England, Scotland and Wales to ensure a coordinated approach to dealing with thekey issues aVecting our industry and the British consumer. All the main energy suppliers operating in theresidential market in Great Britain are members of the association: British Gas, EDF Energy, npower, E-ON, Scottish Power and Scottish and Southern Energy.

2. The Managing Directors of these six companies make up the Board of the ERA, who work closely withthe Chief Executive Duncan Sedgwick. The Board is chaired by Willie MacDiarmid, Managing Director,Energy Retail at Scottish Power.

3. In the four years of its existence the ERA has continually focused on finding ways to improvecustomers’ experiences with their electricity and gas suppliers. Much of the work we do is related to energyeYciency and helping suppliers and Government to develop policy for schemes such as the Energy EYciencyCommitment and the Carbon Emissions Reduction Targets, and supporting polices to tackle fuel poverty.An area of focus for the ERA is our pioneering work on smart metering, which has the potential to makesignificant progress in the fight against climate change. It is on that subject which we are making asubmission to this inquiry.

Overview

4. The ERA wishes to make a general response to this inquiry, drawing the attention of theEnvironmental Audit Committee to the potential oVered by a national roll-out of smart meters to tackleclimate change at a local or devolved level. In particular, we feel that the issue of smart meters relates toquestion seven in the call for evidence:

27 One Planet Living is a joint initiative between WWF and BioRegional, see www.oneplanetliving.org28 http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/z-squared2004.pdf29 See http://southeast.sustainability-checklist.co.uk/ for the SE version of the Checklist.


What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do the diVerent levels of Government have suYcientpowers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? What policies areworking well?

5. We feel that in order for regional and local Government to take eVective action to reduce carbonemissions, there needs to be a national policy to roll-out smart meters to every home as quickly as possible.

6. Currently, consumer awareness of their carbon footprint remains low. The idea of energy consumptionremains intangible, with customers and suppliers relying on estimated bills and meter reading visits to gaugehow much electricity and gas is being consumed by a household. (Although devices are available to givecustomers readings on their electricity use, the information displayed is not 100% accurate, and they oVer noinformation on gas use, which comprises the majority of most households’ consumption). Without accurateconsumption data, it is diYcult to create consumer “pull” around reducing energy use, and correspondinglyto identify how savings could be made.

7. Energy companies are also aware that the current energy supply market is due to changefundamentally over the next ten years. As part of its strategy to tackle climate change, Government isrequiring companies, as part of their post 2011 supplier obligations, to turn around their operating modelsto one where they become profitable through encouraging customers to reduce their energy consumption.To comply with these obligations, we need to develop commercial incentives for producing and using lessenergy. This cannot be achieved without the enabling technology of smart meters. Until companies are ableto pinpoint how, where and when energy is being used, we will not be able to work with customers to developcommercially viable, targeted and eVective consumption reduction schemes.

8. Smart meters oVer consumers and energy supply companies the means to measure each household’soverall energy consumption, and work with local or regional Governments to become more energy eYcient.

What is a smart meter?

9. Smart meters are the next generation of electricity and gas meters. They will bring about the end ofestimated bills and meter readings, and provide customers and energy suppliers with accurate informationon the amount of electricity and gas being used. They will also provide the platform for the development ofa much greater choice in energy tariVs and services for all homes.

10. Smart meters empower customers to make choices on how much energy they choose to use. Supplierswill install two-way communication systems that display accurate real-time information on energy use inthe home to the consumer and back to the energy supplier. In addition, smart meters enable:

— flexible tariVs that measure consumption over set time periods;

— automatic and actual meter readings that will bring an end to estimated bills;

— capability for selling energy back to the supplier which will facilitate microgeneration technology(eg solar panels or wind turbines);

— the same electricity and gas meters to be used for all customers, whether they are pre-payment orcredit; and

— improved accuracy of forecasting energy demand at diVerent times of the day.

11. Delivering smart meters will require an ambitious home visit programme. With 45 million domesticmeters throughout Britain, the roll-out of smart meters promises to be more extensive than othertechnological and social transformations such as decimalisation, the provision of North Sea gas to homesand, more recently, the introduction of chip and pin. If given the necessary mandate by Government, theindustry will invest in introducing smart meters, and aim to ensure that after a 10 year roll-out plan, everyhome in Britain has a 100% accurate method of energy billing.

12. The ERA members are very keen to begin this lengthy and complex process. However, our industrycannot introduce smart meters without a mandate from Government to do so because of statutoryrequirements concerning competition and an incomplete business case. Only with a mandate fromGovernment can we work with the regulator to ensure that the roll-out of smart meters is implemented aseYciently and cost-eVectively as possible, and that reductions in carbon emissions are realised.

Policy Context

13. The EU Energy End-use EYciency and Energy Services Directive, which was agreed in December2005, requires Member States to develop national action plans for achieving a one per cent annual energysaving target from end-users. The UK Government has held consultations and produced the Energy WhitePaper in July 2007 to meet this need. In order to comply with the EU Energy Services Directive, the UKGovernment is required to publish a national action plan by May 2008. This Directive also containsprovisions for time-of-use meters to be installed on a new and replacement basis where it is cost eVective todo so; plans for this measure must be brought into UK law by 2008. The Department for Environment,Food and Rural AVairs (Defra) has the policy lead on bringing the provisions of the Directive into UK law.


14. The Energy White Paper produced by the UK Department of Business, Enterprise and RegulatoryReform (BERR) expressed an ambition that every home in the UK would have a smart meter within tenyears. It also outlined three core billing and metering activities that would heighten awareness of energy useand reduce consumption:

— information on bills: to promote awareness of domestic energy use through a requirement onenergy suppliers to present consumption data on consumers’ bills to allow them to comparediVerent periods of energy consumption;

— information on display: to promote awareness of domestic energy use through a requirement toprovide certain customers with real-time display units so that they can see in real time, and in away relevant to them, how much energy they are consuming and what it is costing; and

— immediate delivery: to ensure that business customers in those sectors of the market where it wasnow cost-eVective would receive smart meters over the next five years.

15. We are firmly of the view that the energy eYciency and carbon reduction objectives of the EU, theUK Government and, indeed, the Welsh Government, are unlikely to be achieved with the currenttechnological and administrative arrangements for metering and billing. We believe that once smart metershave been rolled out over England, Wales and Scotland, an infrastructure will be in place making it possiblefor devolved, regional and local Governments to develop their own plans for reducing carbon emissions.This will help the UK to make the considerable carbon reductions necessary to meet the challenging targetsset out the in Climate Change Bill.

Smart meters: enabling innovation in carbon reduction

16. A national smart metering system would enable local authorities and regional Governments to workwith energy supply companies and their constituents to cut carbon emissions in their area. Armed withaccurate data on local energy use, it is possible for regional plans to be developed, which relate to specificconsumption patterns or opportunities aVorded by a particular region.

17. An example would be the possibility of promoting domestic wind generation in coastal areas, or partsof Scotland or Wales where the generation potential is greatest. Smart meters, with their capability to importand export energy from the grid, open up the possibility of local authorities and energy supply companiesworking together to encourage greater exploitation of the UK’s low-carbon energy sources, as well asmeasuring the impact that these steps have on regional and local consumption patterns.

How can the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry help?

18. Th ERA fully supports the Government’s ambitious targets on carbon emissions reductions, but webelieve that this cannot happen without the wealth of accurate consumption data oVered by smart meters.It is our hope that the Government will go further than the ambition expressed in the Energy White Paperin June, and make an unambiguous commitment to smart meters in the forthcoming Energy Bill, grantingthe industry the mandate it needs. There is considerable cross-party support in Westminster, Holyrood andthe Senedd for smart meters, and it is our hope that the recommendations following the Committee’s inquirywill recognise how smart meters will promote innovation in localised energy reduction.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Wildlife Trusts

Introduction

1. The Wildlife Trusts (TWTs) welcome the opportunity to respond to the Environmental AuditCommittee Inquiry into “Climate change and local, regional and devolved government”.

2. There are 47 local Wildlife Trusts across the whole of the UK, the Isle of Man and Alderney. We areworking for an environment rich in wildlife for everyone. With more than 720,000 members, we are thelargest UK voluntary organisation dedicated to conserving the full range of the UK’s habitats and specieswhether they be in the countryside, in cities or at sea. We manage 2,200 nature reserves covering more than80,000 hectares; we stand up for wildlife; we inspire people about the natural world and we foster sustainableliving. For more information on The Wildlife Trusts, please refer to www.wildlifetrusts.org

3. The Wildlife Trusts are heavily engaged in policy and delivery on climate change adaptation atnational, regional and local levels. We work closely with local authorities, regional bodies and devolvedadministrations on a range of aspects of climate change adaptation, from strategy and planning to landmanagement and community development. We have been instrumental in highlighting the importance ofclimate change adaptation for wildlife and people to decision makers, and in particular:


— Habitat opportunity mapping to inform planning decisions, and involvement in developmentcontrol.

— Local and regional climate change action plans.

— Biodiversity adaptation including Local Wildlife Site systems and Biodiversity Action Planning.

— National policy development including membership of the Defra Ecosystems Approach steeringgroup.

4. The Wildlife Trusts have produced a strategy document entitled “A Living Landscape” which calls forthe restoration of the UK’s fragmented ecosystems, for wildlife and people. This report sets out The WildlifeTrusts’ position and vision of the future with regard to adaptation to climate change but also providesnumerous case studies of landscape-scale conservation schemes. The case studies demonstrate where we aredirectly engaged in delivering the adaptation changes required on the ground, and the holistic benefits thatthis work can bring. The document is available to download from the “publications” page ofwww.wildlifetrusts.org

5. We would be pleased to provide further information in relation to points raised in this response.

6. This response focuses on climate change adaptation. Whilst The Wildlife Trusts recognise theimportance of climate change mitigation measures, we believe that other bodies are better placed than usto comment on mitigation in relation to local, regional and devolved government. The Wildlife Trusts’considerable skills and expertise on climate change adaptation means that this forms the principal focus forour submission.

General Comments

7. The Wildlife Trusts believe that local, regional and devolved government must give climate changeadaptation the same urgency and priority as they have given to climate change mitigation. This is essential ifeach level of government is to respond to the unavoidable impacts of a changing climate, and anunpredictable future. Indeed, we believe that environmental adaptation is essential to underpin our climatechange response for both wildlife and people, providing wide ranging solutions for issues such as flood riskand water management, farming and fuel production, recreation, industry and social development.

8. The scale at which climate change adaptation operates is significant, and local, regional and devolvedgovernments will need to work at a landscape-scale in order to plan and deliver eVectively. Operating on asite by site basis will be insuYcient, and authorities will need to consider the functioning of whole ecosystemsrather than simply individual components within them, to maintain and enhance the resilience andconnectivity of the natural environment.

9. Operating at an ecosystem and landscape-scale will require a robust information base and habitatopportunity mapping will be required across all local, regional and devolved government areas to informthe planning and land use decision making required for climate change adaptation.

10. At sea, the most eVective climate change adaptation measure should be the introduction of newmarine legislation.

Specific Comments

How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government and devolvedadministrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areas like wasteand transport? What funding, powers and structures are required to improve joined up delivery of climate changepolicy at all levels of government?

11. The Stern Review has warned us of the economic consequences of not prioritising environmentalclimate change adaptation. We must therefore see real joined up central Government in our response, witha focus on long term sustainable development and quality of life, rather than simply short term economicgain. Whilst we are seeing some positive steps from central Government in this direction (eg with the recentlaunch of the Defra Ecosystems Approach and Action Plan), policy join up across departments is weak.Proposed reforms in planning and regional governance for example within CLG, threaten to undermine theconcept of environmentally sustainable development by giving disproportionate weight to economicgrowth. Central Government needs to show greater leadership on climate change adaptation with joined uppolicy across departments and a strong steer for local, regional and devolved administrations.

12. There are two particular areas of policy that would support climate change adaptation (others arehighlighted later in this submission in response to specific questions). The first is to ensure that changes inregional governance in England result in a new body with sustainable development at its heart and with properaccountability and representation. This would mean that planning decisions would take appropriate accountof the natural environment, and the proposed Integrated Regional Strategies would have an eVectiveenvironmental component in the face of climate change (see attached briefing on changes in regionalgovernance in England). The second is to place a new duty on all public bodies for sustainable flood


management. This would promote more appropriate land management and development to take account ofclimate change adaptation, and would also provide an eVective means of transposing the new EU FloodsDirective.

Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can accountability andtransparency of the response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?

13. Duties already exist on public bodies to take account of climate change adaptation such as thebiodiversity duty in the NERC Act 2006. However, The Wildlife Trusts believe that greater emphasis andencouragement is required for public bodies to understand, prioritise and resource this duty as a response toclimate change. Local and regional bodies can meet many of their climate change adaptation needs byfocusing on biodiversity measures such as operating Local Wildlife Site systems to Defra commonstandards, managing their own land holdings to benefit biodiversity, bringing protected sites into favourablemanagement condition, and planning large-scale habitat restoration and creation programmes.


14. The current climate change adaptation indicator within the local government performanceframework is a good starting point for action. However, this is a process target for producing adaptationstrategies and requires complementary outcome targets on delivery of the adaptation response. Theindicator on local biodiversity provides one measure of such an outcome, highlighting the performance ofLocal Wildlife Site systems. The Wildlife Trusts recommend that these two indicators are promoted and usedtogether to encourage a strategic approach and eVective delivery of climate change adaptation. We also believethat the climate change adaptation indicator should be seen as an underpinning measure which influencesactivity in other areas such as planning, transport, waste and water.

15. The challenge for local government is that these two indicators are adopted within Local AreaAgreements and that funding is attached to them. The Wildlife Trusts believe that greater encouragementshould be provided to Local Authorities and regional bodies on the critical importance of climate changeadaptation as well as mitigation, and that these indicators should be adopted as priorities.

To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland Hwill set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction ratherthan UK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030,fit together with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emission, and the impact of carbon reduction policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

16. The Wildlife Trusts believe that there is a role for targets in relation to adaptation as well asmitigation, for example the local government indicators and targets mentioned above for Local Wildlife Sitesystems and climate change strategies. Targets also exist for condition of Sites of Special Scientific Interestand for habitat maintenance, restoration and creation within local, regional and country BiodiversityAction Plans (BAP). The Wildlife Trusts believe that UK BAP habitat targets set within regional and localhabitat opportunity mapping should form the basis for targets for adaptation of the natural environment toclimate change.

How advanced and coordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climate change?What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are local authorities, regionalgovernment and devolved administrations?

17. Regional and local climate change action plans are being developed across the country, but have avaried level of priority aVorded to adaptation. The Wildlife Trusts believe that greater coordination andguidance is required for these plans to be eVective, with outcomes focused on resilient, functioning ecosystemsand habitat connectivity. Green infrastructure plans and studies are also being developed in response togrowth and housing development. It is essential that these plans take proper account of the needs of wildlifein relation to climate change adaptation and do not simply view green infrastructure as recreational space.

18. Local authorities are impacted directly by climate change through management of their own land,public spaces such as parks and through programmes such as tree planting and maintenance. Further workis needed to encourage demonstrations and models of climate change management of such spaces topromote adaptation for wildlife and encourage use by people. Greater coordination and consideration


should also be given to the role of land management more broadly in supporting climate change. Forexample, in the uplands mechanisms are required to promote restoration of peatlands (having addedbenefits of carbon and water storage), or encourage sustainable farming and forestry practice.


19. The Wildlife Trusts believe that the Committee on Climate Change should have balanced expertise andrepresentation from those involved in climate change adaptation in addition to mitigation. The Committeeshould also have balanced representation across the interests of sustainable development, reflecting thenatural environment, social issues and economics.

What are the barriers to greater local or regional action? Do diVerent levels of government have suYcientpowers to take action? What changes in policy are needed to support action at a local level? What policies areworking well?

20. There are several barriers that exist to local or regional action on climate change adaptation. Manyof these stem from the lack of joined up policy making from central Government which is reflected indecisions at local and regional level, and from the need for better strategic planning for adaptation throughhabitat opportunity mapping.

21. For example, the proposed changes in the current Planning Bill threaten action at the local level bydetermining Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects without local consultation. This will result inphysical barriers that damage existing habitat, prevent habitat expansion and block species movement.

22. Conflicts in priorities also threaten eVective adaptation, such as pressure for hard flood defences inall flood risk areas rather than integrating these with natural solutions, or pressure for development on sitesthat are strategically important for adaptation. The Wildlife Trusts believe that greater emphasis needs to beplaced on habitat opportunity mapping to help direct decision making of local, regional and devolvedgovernment.


23. The new Planning Policy Statement on climate change is weak on adaptation and in itself is unlikelyto promote the urgency and scale of the task of our response to climate change impacts. The Wildlife Trustswelcome the recent climate change amendment announced to the Planning Bill, that highlights:

“Development plan documents must (taken as a whole) include policies designed to secure that thedevelopment and use of land in the local planning authority’s area contributes to the mitigation of,and adaptation to, climate change”.

24. This goes some way to ensuring that planning takes account of the needs of climate changeadaptation, but further clarity is required. For example, more emphasis is required to stress the importanceof protecting the integrity of the SSSI system in the face of major infrastructure projects.

Are local authorities meeting their duty to enforce building regulations in relation to environmentalmeasures? Does the enforcement regime discourage non-compliance?

25. Building regulations should be considered to promote climate change adaptation as well as standardsto reduce emissions. The Wildlife Trusts believe that stronger regulations to promote adaptation are requiredthat include siting, provision of services such as sustainable urban drainage schemes, use of landscaping(including green roofs and green walls) and greenspace management.

What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central governmentsupport sharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, SalixFinance, the Carbon Trust and Energy Savings Trust play in providing support?

26. Good practice should also be seen in relation to adaptation as well as mitigation. The Wildlife Trustshave significant expertise in this area with approximately 150 landscape-scale initiatives under development topromote climate change adaptation. Greater integration is needed between statutory, public and voluntarysector bodies at local and regional level to share expertise and coordinate activity on climate changeadaptation.

3 January 2008


Memorandum submitted by the South East Climate Change Partnership

About the South East Climate Change Partnership

The South East Climate Change Partnership (SECCP) is the leading forum that engages, inspires andempowers the development and implementation of solutions for a South East region that is resilient toclimate change and low-carbon, benefiting current and future generations.

The Partnership is an independent, not for profit organisation funded by our members. We bring togethermore than 50 public, private and voluntary sector organisations from across the South East.

We work in the following ways:

Sharing good practice

— Encouraging partners to address climate change and to be champions for their stakeholders andcommunities by sharing good practice and through education.

Solutions-driven

— Providing, advising on and advocating eVective climate change solutions relevant to the SouthEast region.

Joint working

— Championing joint working between partners and with others to be more eVective in tackling theimpacts and reducing the causes of climate change.

Staying Informed

— Communicating and interpreting scientific research and information on developments in climatechange policy and guidance, linking them to real-world solutions.

Aaptation focused

— Building on our strong track record in this emerging area, the Partnership will continue to play aunique role through our focus on adaptation to the impacts of climate change. In all of our work,we will look for opportunities to improve the region’s resilience to the impacts of climate changeand to integrate climate resilience with carbon reduction.

We work closely with national organisations such as the UK Climate Impacts Programme and those inother regions of the UK who are addressing similar issues.

Further information about the Partnership and copies of our publications and newsletters can be foundon our website www.climatesoutheast.org.uk This response outlines the views of the Partnership. Inaddition, some of our Partners may submit detailed individual responses.

General

We welcome the opportunity to share our views and experience with the Environmental Audit Committeeon this important subject. The science of climate change has progressed very rapidly in recent years, alongwith our understanding of the urgency of the response needed. However, our experience tells us that theimplementation of the required changes is generally progressing very slowly, if at all. This is especially truein the field of adaptation to the impacts of climate change, where much depends on an assessment ofexpected risks and the solutions are not always well developed or demonstrably cost eVective, especially inthe short term. However, the severe impact of the floods of summer 2007 on households, businesses andinfrastructure demonstrates the need to prepare for the eVects of extreme weather events.

Policies and targets are being developed at all levels and pockets of good practice exist in both reducinggreenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change. These must gather momentum inorder to move ahead at the pace needed. This will require strong leadership, coordination and cooperationbetween the diVerent levels of government and dedicated resources. It is vitally important that adaptationto the impacts of climate change is prioritised clearly alongside mitigation of the causes.


Response to Set Questions

1. How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government and devolvedadministrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areas like wasteand transport? What funding, powers and structures are required to improve joined up delivery of climate changepolicy at all levels of government?

— Showing leadership and setting clear national goals through the Climate Change Bill and aprogramme to deliver it, including guidance for regional implementation.

— Providing clear, consistent and useable methods for setting baselines and recording carbonemissions.

— By integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation policies more clearly into nationalpolicies, eg on waste, transport (including aviation and shipping) and energy.

— By providing financial incentives, eg through the taxation system, to householders, businesses andcommunities for practical and proven mitigation and adaptation responses, helping localauthorities to achieve local targets. There may also be opportunities to support regional bodiesand councils that oVer such incentives at a local level, eg linking water and energy eYciency to localtaxation.

— By widely disseminating established good practice and encouraging take-up. There are manyexamples of good projects and good practice that work, but these are not being widely replicated.

— Supporting partnership working. Working in partnership enables regional and local bodies toengage with and learn from other similar organisations and with the private sector. Poolingknowledge, skills, experience and resources is vital if change is to happen at the pace required andif national targets are to be met. Regional climate change partnerships such as the SECCP haveproved a successful model, enabling members to access the latest information, keep up to date withpolicies, network eVectively and develop tools and guidance for local authorities. However,Partnerships require full-time coordination to be successful. Government should encouragemembership of such partnerships and show its support for their work by funding a proportion ofthe running costs.

2. Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can the accountabilityand transparency of response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?

In the South East, the regional agencies have begun working together to develop a joined-up strategy.There is still some way to go on this, especially as the future roles of the agencies are unclear in the light ofthe government’s Sub-national Review. It seems that the Development Agencies will have increasingresponsibility for delivering challenging climate change targets and this will involve working very closelywith local authorities.

The response to climate change is best determined at a local level in order to identify the most suitableways to reduce greenhouse gasses or adapt to the expected impacts on the local community. The regionaland local authorities should therefore play an important role in implementing agreed targets on the ground.This will require local authorities to tap into and provide support for local community initiatives. Suchinitiatives seem, in our experience, to be most eVective when visibly led by the local community, but withsupport from the local council.

The Nottingham Declaration has been extremely useful in engaging local authorities and many in thesouth east are signatories. It is eVective in generating interest and discussion and sets some actions againstwhich the councils can report and be scrutinised. However, the Declaration is just a first step andcoordinated local and regional action is needed to deliver and move beyond these commitments. It is vitalthat local commitments are supported by clear and achievable delivery plans and that they contribute toachieving national targets.

Currently regions and authorities are struggling to identify clear methods for either setting a baseline ofcurrent or historical carbon emissions, or of adequately tracking current and future emissions. Progress isbeing made, but it is extremely important that these calculations are made as consistently as possible andwithout much further delay so that reporting can begin and provide reliable data for assessing andcomparing local, regional and national progress.



We strongly welcome the inclusion of key performance indicators on climate change in the new LocalArea Agreement framework. We are especially pleased that an indicator on adaptation to the impacts ofclimate change appears for the first time. This will encourage local authorities to consider the impacts ofclimate change on investment projects and infrastructure, avoiding considerable additional costs over thecoming years and decades. However, there is currently no requirement on local authorities to include anyof the climate change indicators in their agreement, which is likely to result in patchy reporting and progress,which may aVect our ability to meet regional and national targets. This seems to run contrary to governmentstatements which declare climate change to be the greatest challenge we face. As the Stern Review indicates,there is a strong economic case for investing now to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to theimpacts of our changing climate. While local authorities must have flexibility to identify the best localresponses, climate change should be at the core of their strategies.

4. To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland will set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanthe UK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030,fit together with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions and the impact of carbon reductions policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

The logical starting place for emissions reductions targets should be in scientific evidence. The latestreports from the IPCC indicate that in order to keep global temperature rise within or close to 20C, abovewhich “dangerous” climate change is expected, we need to stabilise global atmospheric CO2 concentrationsat or below 450 parts per million. For the UK to play its fair share in achieving this reduction, we wouldneed to cut our carbon emissions by 80% by 2050 (the target until now has been 60%). It would be helpfulfor the UK government to work as quickly as possible to define the targets that will be included in theClimate Change Bill (or to set a clear timescale for the review following its introduction). It is our view thatthese targets should be in line with the scientific evidence to aim to avoid dangerous climate change and toencourage other countries to follow suit.

Regional Bodies and Local Authorities have rightly moved ahead with setting their own targets and arestarting to deliver on them. However, only when the national targets have been defined can we piece togetherhow the various local, regional and national targets feed into each other and make any necessaryadjustments. In order to make sense of and eVectively monitor such long-term national targets, we need aclear trajectory of interim targets, ideally of around 3% per year. This would enable government to plan out,in cooperation with the regions, how the targets fit together. For instance, some regions may oVeropportunities for larger or earlier savings than others so regional targets and timescales may vary so longas the overall direction fits with the trajectory. In the south east, work is already underway to map out whatthis trajectory might look like in the region, but it would be helpful to have more certainty about nationaltargets and emissions monitoring methods and about the future roles of the regional bodies in implementingthe required carbon reductions.

The regional bodies and some local authorities in the South East have already set themselves ambitioustargets and are making progress towards achieving significant carbon reductions—it is important that thisprogress is valued as the current delays in setting national targets may lead to some authorities delayingaction until such time as they can be sure it will be recognised.

5. How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climatechange? What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are the local authorities,regional government and devolved administrations?

At a regional level and in some local authorities, adaptation to the impacts of climate change is beginningto be integrated into strategies and policies, but generally it still has a lower priority than mitigation of thecauses. This is a cause of concern as the scientific evidence is now very clear that we are already experiencingclimate change and that we can expect, in the south east, to be more severely aVected than any other areaof the UK by rising temperatures, summer droughts, winter flooding and sea level rise.

National eVorts so far have mainly focussed on identifying the trends in the UK and providing guidanceon how organisations can identify and assess the risks and opportunities. This has been extremely helpfulbut, as with mitigation, we now need to rapidly make the leap from understanding what needs to be doneto putting in place thorough strategies and action on the ground.


Local and regional preparation for the impacts of climate change is especially important as extremeweather events tend to be fairly localised. The eVects of severe weather depend on both the naturalconditions of the area and on human development, eg extreme temperatures are exacerbated in built upareas by the urban heat island eVect and the eVects of flooding depend on the extent of development in floodrisk areas. Central government must play a role in supporting the development and implementation ofadaptation strategies, but the assessment of risks and opportunities and the best solutions will generally bemost eVectively done at a local level, drawing on local knowledge.

All local authorities in the south east and most areas of their services, infrastructure, facilities and waysof working will be aVected in some way by the kind of changes we expect to see in our climate over thecoming years and decades. These eVects are both economic, eg flood damage to infrastructure andbusinesses and social, eg the health risks of overheating for the young and the elderly. Local Authorities’response to the impacts of climate change will also partly determine how eVective they will be in reducinggreenhouse gas emissions, eg if buildings have to install air conditioning to cope with summer temperaturesor if new, more eYcient buildings are rendered unusable by sea or river flooding, or if public transportsystems cannot cope with severe weather, emissions will rise.

To date the main support for adaptation responses has come from the UK Climate Impacts Programme.Their scenarios, maps and tools have been invaluable in allowing interested organisations to begin assessingrisks and developing strategies to cope with the impacts. UKCIP have played an active role in the variousregional climate change partnerships, including SECCP and have achieved a lot with limited resources.However, UKCIP is not staVed suYciently to provide the kind of support that is available to local andregional businesses, authorities and individuals for mitigation, through the Carbon Trust and EnergySavings Trust. There does not appear to be the same level of support for communications of adaptationissues to organisations and householders, as there has been on mitigation. In order to deliver a coordinatedand coherent response to climate change, tackling both the causes and the eVects, we need to increasesupport at the national and regional level for adaptation and integrate it more closely with mitigation.Government could send a clear signal of its commitment to a joined-up response to climate change bycommitting itself to long-term funding of UKCIP and provision of regional support to adaptation.

At a regional level the only current support mechanism for regional and local authorities is through theregional climate change partnerships. These partnerships have developed independently of each other andvary in structure, funding and work programmes, but share a focus on adaptation to the impacts of climatechange and work together to share experience, good practice and to feed into policy development. Thepartnerships provide the link between the UKCIP scenarios and tools and the regional and local bodies whoneed to use them. Some of the regional partnerships work exclusively on adaptation to climate impacts,while others, like the SECCP, work on climate change in the round. The Partnership is the only region-wideforum in the south east where regional bodies, local authorities, private businesses and non governmentalorganisations come together to share and coordinate climate change solutions through sharing information,learning and case studies, developing guidance and tools, communicating the issues and successes andfeeding in jointly to policy development.

The SECCP has developed a good working relationship with Defra and other relevant governmentdepartments, but has received no central government funding for its coordination or administration. ThePartnership meets its running costs through membership funding, but would benefit enormously from theadded value some central financial support would give, both through the message this would give to localauthorities about the high priority and urgency of adaptation and also through the increased security offunding to enable us to focus on delivering solutions on the ground and to widen our communications.Currently not all local authorities belong to or take part in their regional climate change Partnership,although an increasing number are joining as climate change becomes a higher priority for them. Moreactive central support for the Partnerships and encouragement of local authorities to get involved would bevery beneficial, eg as a natural follow-on to signing the Nottingham Declaration and as part of the meansto deliver the Local Area Agreement targets.


As stated above, local responses to climate change are vital to ensure that the solutions adopted are themost suitable and are sustainable. Coordination between national legislation and local councils and theircommunities will be key to delivering carbon reduction targets. The Committee on Climate Change shouldadvise on making and improving the links between national and local implementation and, as such, shouldinclude individuals with a good knowledge of the workings of regional bodies, councils and communities.This could, but does not necessarily, mean that the committee should include members of regional or localauthorities. What is, perhaps, more important is that the committee should have strong links to andcommunications with regional and local bodies and that it should pay attention to regional and localdiVerences in the advice that it gives.



Short-term economic decision making is perhaps the key barrier to delivering the necessary changes, bothlocally and nationally. The regional bodies are taking steps to overcome this through setting long-termregional strategies, including action on climate change. However, there remains some tension between thesustainable development objectives in these strategies and national policies, especially regarding housingdevelopment, transport and energy policies. The regional bodies are working to understand and resolvethese tensions, but will need clear prioritisation from central government. Many local authorities are alsosetting clear and long term strategies for reducing emissions, but again they would benefit from greatersupport from government, both through leadership on climate change issues and financial support for suchlong-term planning.

Climate change, including adaptation, is still seen as a purely environmental issue by many localauthorities and is dealt with by an individual or small team within the authority, rather than being fullyintegrated into decision making and policy across the authority, eg planners, service providers etc, wherethe real diVerence could be made. A shift in thinking is required and increasingly we need to find ways tomake sure that all planning, reviews and decisions are put through a filter of the need to (measurably) reducegreenhouse gas emissions and to ensure resilience to the impacts of climate change. Some local authoritiesare already successfully moving in this direction.

The South East Climate Change Partnership has undertaken various pieces of work to identify thebarriers to actions in the South East. We are currently a partner in the European funded ESPACE projecton spatial planning and adaptation, led by Hampshire County Council, which is examining theorganisational, policy and other barriers to adaptation to climate change with a view to developing andtrialling solutions and recommendations. We would be happy to provide the committee with moreinformation and background reports.

Our experience is that strong and positive leadership at a senior level within an organisation is most likelyto lead to the development and integration of strong and successful policies on climate change, whether inreducing emissions, preparing for the eVects of climate change or both. The other main factor aVecting theresponse of a local authority is obligation to either fulfil legislative requirements or to report and bemeasured against targets. Planning regulations and legislation on river and coastal management planningwill help to quickly and consistently improve standards and planning for some aspects of adaptation. Whilethe introduction of performance indicators in Local Area Agreements will help, they are not compulsoryso local authorities who are not performing well in this area may opt not to include these targets in theiragreements.


We welcome the new Planning Policy Statement on climate change and believe this will play an importantrole in integrating climate change considerations into the planning process. Our Partners may respondindividually in more detail on this point.

However, we are concerned that other changes to national planning legislation will reduce localparticipation in the planning process in order to enable more rapid processing of applications for majorinfrastructure projects and that this may lead to projects being approved which commit the UK (andparticular regions) to increased carbon emissions.


We are not aware of any major problems with non-compliance in relation to enforcement of the buildingregulations, but our individual partners may submit more detailed responses on this point based on theirexperience.

However, building regulations have, to date, been much weaker on adaptation to the impacts of climatechange than on emissions reductions. This is especially true in relation to the eVects of high temperatures.Given that by the 2050s, the heatwave experienced in 2003 is likely to represent a normal summer,overheating potential should be actively reduced in the construction of all new houses. This would havehealth benefits and would also reduce the need for energy intensive air conditioning to be installed infuture—otherwise the gains in energy eYciency achieved through the building regulations may be lost as airconditioning is retro-fitted.

We are also concerned that the emphasis on building regulations and planning consents means that thevast bulk of our housing and infrastructure are being overlooked. Across the greater South East, over 70%of the housing that will be around in the 2050s has already been built. We must act swiftly to make energysavings accessible and mainstream for all householders and to better reduce and manage the eVects of


increased flooding, drought and overheating on these buildings. The same is true of our roads, railways,businesses, drainage systems, etc. All of these issues should be accorded the same priority as changes to andenforcement of the building regulations.


See answer to question 5.

The regional climate change partnerships in the UK, including the SECCP, all work closely with the UKClimate Impacts Programme. For instance, a representative of UKCIP sits on the SECCP ExecutiveCommittee and SECCP attends an interregional meeting of the climate change partnerships together withUKCIP and others three times a year to exchange information, best practice and to feed in to policydevelopment. The UKCIP scenarios and tools provide an invaluable foundation for our regional projectsand guidance, and the UKCIP08 scenarios will help to improve local risk-based planning.

The South East Climate Change Partnership will continue to work closely with UKCIP, the Carbon Trustand others as appropriate over the coming years to move towards our vision of a climate resilient and low-carbon south east.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by Micropower Council

Summary

1. The Micropower Council welcomes the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry into the role oflocal, regional and devolved government in tackling climate change. This inquiry is timely because we havemajor concerns that progressive local and regional authorities are not having their voice heard when it comesto setting national policy for housing, planning and other policies that will impact on the UK response toClimate Change.

2. The recent debate over the Merton rule is symptomatic of a wider issue in that the house buildingindustry has greater access to and is allowed greater influence over initial policy discussions in areas suchas planning and housing. This makes it much harder for local, regional and devolved bodies, along withgreen groups to engage in the policy making process and to raise concerns at the right stage.

Who We Are

3. The Micropower Council is a cross-industry body that represents the interests of the micropowersector. The terms “micropower” and “microgeneration” are interchangeable and relate to low carbon andrenewable energy producing technologies that can be installed on domestic and small scale commercialproperties. Examples of such technology include but are not limited to micro-wind, fuel cells, microCHP,solar thermal, PV, ground source heat pumps, biomass boilers, and micro-hydro. Microgenerationtechnologies oVer huge potential for the generation of renewable heat and power in the future.

A list of our members is available at: http://www.micropower.co.uk/council/members.html

4. We provide the Micropower industry’s main focal point for Government, regulators, Parliament,opinion formers and the general public on regulation and public policy issues aVecting the production byconsumers of their own sustainable heat and power.

Why Microgeneration

5. We believe that microgeneration can, given the right policy framework, play an important role intackling climate change and addressing the key goals of energy policy for two principal reasons:

(a) The direct impact of the technology through production of energy from low or zero carbonsources. In large volumes the potential is significant.

(b) The increased use of energy eYciency and conservation measures as consumers and businessesbecome more engaged and interested in their own use of energy, and of its consequences.


Introduction

6. It is of paramount importance that local, regional and devolved levels of government play their partin helping the UK move towards a reduced emissions low carbon economy. We are working closely with anumber of tiers of government to promote greater take up of microgeneration, including leading localauthorities such as Merton, the devolved administrations in Wales and Scotland and many otherorganisations, including the Greater London Assembly.

7. A recent report by the Government’s Renewables Advisory Board suggested that the market formicrogeneration technologies could be worth up to £3 billion by 2016, but only if Government does moreto encourage microgeneration adoption. We believe that local, regional and devolved layers of governmentare vital to achieving this, not only through the policies they implement, but also by taking a lead indemonstrating to Government how it can be achieved and in pressuring Government into action.

Merton Rule

8. The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government recently published the Government’sPlanning Policy Statement (PPS) on Climate Change. Earlier draft versions of the statement suggested thatthe successful “Merton Rule” policy would be discarded as a result of pressure from the buildings industry.The mobilisation of local authority and environmental group’s support for the Merton Rule prevented theGovernment from discarding Merton in the PPS.

9. The “Merton Rule” should remain in place until 2016, and be developed to create a greater carbonfocus. Merton has been a key driver of capacity building in the microgeneration industry in recent years.Between now and 2016, Merton style policies will enable local planning authorities to insist on the road-testing of renewables and low carbon homes. Only by acting now to develop design and standards, will webe able to achieve zero-carbon homes in 2016.

10. Despite claims by the Government that it has introduced “Merton Plus” the finalised PPS documentlooks to remove the right of planning authorities to set renewable energy targets across their jurisdiction.Instead each development must be assessed individually and no renewable energy target can be attached toan individual planning application. This will make it extremely diYcult to have a Merton style Rule to boostthe UK’s renewable energy generation and reduce household carbon emissions. The gulf between CLG’srhetoric and the actual detail of the policy has created confusion amongst both those campaigning for andagainst the Merton Rule as to the Government’s true position. This is likely to prevent pioneering councilsfrom implementing the policies that would require housebuilders to test design standards and techniquesfor low carbon homes. This will make it almost impossible to achieve the Government’s aspirational targetof zero-carbon homes by 2016.

Regional Government

11. In too many cases, policy makers are divorcing the issue of aVordable housing and planning policyfrom measures to improve energy eYciency and use of microgeneration. The Mayor of London hasdemonstrated that positive results can be achieved by involving energy suppliers, technology manufacturersand others early in the planning policy process.

12. In London, the Mayor’s London Plan or Spatial Development Strategy, was published in February2004. It provided London with its first planning and development strategy in a generation. The plan’spolicies are proving influential in improving delivery in a range of areas including energy eYciency andmicrogeneration, helping to tackle climate change. The Mayor has recently proposed further alterationswhich will double the onsite renewable energy requirements for new buildings from the 10% target in thecurrent Plan.

13. As part of his statutory duty to regularly review the London Plan, in October 2007 the Mayorproposed that all new developments in London must achieve a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of atleast 20 per cent by using renewable sources of energy. He also proposed new objectives for planners anddevelopers to adopt energy saving approaches, such as requiring new developments to connect to“decentralised” local energy supplies and achieve the highest standards of sustainable building design.

14. Microgeneration is at the cutting edge of new “green technology” and the industry is already a UKsuccess story. A number of regional bodies have recognised that progress in this sector can help to increaseeconomic prosperity and employment prospects.

15. For example, the North West Regional Development Agency (NWDA) has identified Energy andEnvironmental Technologies as a key sector for economic growth in the Northwest and is investing heavilyin them. This has led the NWDA to invest in projects such as the Joule Centre for Energy Research. The


Joule Centre was oYcially launched in 2006 and marks the creation of the Northwest’s first centre for thedevelopment of sustainable energy technologies. Based at Manchester University, it will pioneer smart andlow-carbon technologies for the home and industry, including wave, tidal and micro-hydro technologies.

16. The Regional Assembly for Yorkshire and Humber sponsors its own Microgeneration Awards,oVering local people the chance to show oV their pioneering green energy projects. Yorkshire and Humberis also one of the first Regional Assemblies to adopt a “Merton Rule” type planning policy by requiring atleast 10% of the energy to be used in sizeable new development to come from on-site renewable sources.

17. Many other regional bodies have also recognised the economic and environmental benefits that canbe achieved and are providing leadership on climate change.

Devolved Government

18. Devolution has created new opportunities for developing policies for tackling climate change. Forthe microgeneration sector, the Welsh Assembly Government has taken significant steps to promote greatertake-up and has taken forward a number of steps, including an action plan for microgeneration publishedin March 2007. The action plan went a step further than measures proposed for microgeneration elsewherein that it outlined aspirational targets for take up.

19. The Plan sets out significant targets and identifies a number of key actions that need to beimplemented to achieve results. These range from new training initiatives, planning guidance formicrogeneration systems and increased use of microgeneration technologies across the public sector.

20. The aspirational targets for installing new microgeneration installations in Wales are:

— 20,000 microgeneration heating units by 2012;

— approximately 100,000 micro heating units installed by 2020;

— 10,000 micro electricity units installed by 2012;

— circa 200,000 micro electricity units by 2020;

— 50 combined heat and power and/or district heating systems by 2020.

21. The Welsh Assembly Government is currently reviewing permitted development rights forhouseholder microgeneration with the intention of easing planning red tape for consumers who wish toinstall it.

22. “A Low Carbon Building Standards Strategy for Scotland” was published in December 2007. Thereport was commissioned by the Scottish Executive and undertaken by an expert group from the housebuilding industry. It sets out the issues confronting the house building industry in Scotland as it tries to movetowards zero carbon homes and looks to set in motion several work streams. However the process, atpresent, excludes relevant input from both the local government and energy sector. Many of the assumptionsbeing made about zero and low carbon technologies, and their application, could be improved by engagingwith those local authorities which have implemented Merton Rule policies to encourage low carbon energyin new developments.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Green Alliance

Introduction

1. Green Alliance is an independent charity with a central role in the UK environment movement. Wework closely with decision-makers in government and business, and with other environment groups,promoting policies for a better environment.

2. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this enquiry. The role of local government in tacklingclimate change and the policy framework needed to both enable and drive greater action, has been the focusof a Green Alliance project over the past 18 months. The work culminated in a report we published in August2006, Changing places: advancing local government action on climate change. The report looks at what willbe needed to bring about a major increase in the extent and quality of local authority action, focusing inparticular on the role of the new local government performance framework and local area agreements. Italso examines whether the emerging policy framework is capable of delivering what is needed, and assessessome of the overall constraints and barriers to getting the policy framework right.


Responses to Questions


3. A strong policy framework will be essential to bring about a step change in local climate action thatmatches the breadth and the urgency of the challenge. At a national level, the main external drivers forchange in local authorities tend to be duties, Audit Commission inspection and financial penalties, rewardsor benefits. The government has made it clear that it does not favour introducing a duty on climate change,which is at odds with the main thrust of local government reform for less rather than more centrally-drivenpriorities. Without this, the inclusion of climate change in the new local government performanceframework (LGPF) and other policy developments will be crucial.

4. The report we published in August 2006, Changing Places: advancing local government action on climatechange,30 oVers a number of recommendations for ensuring that the new local government performanceframework incentivises greater action on climate change (see response to question 3). We also looked morebroadly at whether the emerging policy framework for local government action on climate change is capableof delivering. At the moment there are a number of constraints and barriers to action that need to be tackledif the policy framework for local climate action is to operate eVectively. These include reliance on wilfulindividuals for climate action, lack of funding for local climate action, and a skills and capacity gap inmany areas.

5. To overcome these issues we recommend:

— Central government must define more clearly what contribution local government should make totackling climate change and be clear about how this fits into action on a national level to curbemissions (see answer to question 2).

— Financial incentives and support will be needed to ensure that local authorities are motivated andequipped to act. And to generate funds for carbon management and climate change adaptation,the government must commit to significant new funding, or should grant councils additionalrevenue raising powers.

— Central government must seek to reduce the complexity local authorities face; both through therequirement to work in partnership with a range of organisations and in accessing appropriateguidance and support.

— Identifying and developing the skills that will be needed by local authorities to tackle climatechange must be a core component of the national improvement strategy proposed in the localgovernment white paper (see answer to question 8).

— Streamlining the plethora of diVerent forms of support and advice and provide clarity around theirpurpose and strengths in order to significantly reduce costs that local authorities have to bear toact on climate change.

2. Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change?

6. Local and regional bodies are recognised as having a leading role in climate change adaptation andmitigation but that role has not been clearly defined. At the moment there is a disconnection between highlevel aspirations for local authority action on climate change, as set out in ministerial speeches and policydocuments, and the expectations on local authorities to deliver.

7. The current policy framework does not clearly define local government’s responsibilities in this area,nor is there a national view of what contribution local government could make and how this fits into actionon a national level to curb emissions and adapt to climate change.

8. Clarifying local government’s role would help ensure the right policy framework and would also givelocal authorities a clearer signal and broad idea of what they should be aiming for. The inclusion of climatechange in the new local government performance framework goes some way towards addressing this butmore is still needed to clarify local government’s role.

9. Given that we know the functions of local government at diVerent levels and how they relate to climatechange adaptation and mitigation, the government needs to define the areas and types of activities councilsshould be looking at to address the issue. This does not have to be either given or taken as a diktat from thecentre but as an extra level of detail of the kind of action that is expected.

30 Tracy Carty and Hannah Hislop, 2006, Changing Places: advancing local government action on climate change, Chapter 2.


3. What, if anything, needs to be changed in the framework governing the actions of devolved administrations,regional government and local authorities?U For example, does there need to be a more explicit reference toclimate change in the local government performance framework and will the new performance indicators onclimate change be enough to stimulate action?

10. We strongly welcome the inclusion of climate change in the new local government performanceframework, however we believe a more explicit reference to climate change is needed. We are concerned thatthe proposed system lacks a mechanism for ensuring that the importance of tackling climate change filtersdown eVectively to local area agreements (LAAs). Pressure from the local strategic partnership, thecommunity and the local authority itself may not be strong enough to ensure local climate action isprioritised in LAAs to the extent that is needed. This is in part because climate change is an area where localdrivers for action may not be suYcient; the benefits of action, and of mitigation in particular, are not alwaystangible or immediate to local communities.

11. We believe that, to minimise this risk, the regional government oYces need to come to the negotiatingtable with an understanding of what the national level ambition for local authority action is and ensure that,as a result of the negotiation process, the aggregate of individual agreements reflects this.

12. As we stated in Changing places, to be eVective, the new LGPF and the inclusion of climate changeas a key theme must also focus on progress towards delivering long-term outcomes as well as short-termimpacts; reflect a national level aspiration for local climate action; and ensure that top performers arerewarded.


13. The main barrier to local climate action has not been a lack of power to act, but the absence of clearresponsibilities and incentives to do so. The policy framework has so far failed to give climate actionprominence and it has been a weak driver for action on the ground.

14. Although there has been innovative and significant action in some areas, climate change is not yet amainstream agenda in local government. Research shows that action has tended to be led by wilfulindividuals with vision and determination, which suggests that the current mix of carrots and sticks has notbeen enough to mobilise an organisational focus on climate change. In many cases where local authoritieshave taken action, the driving force has been potential financial savings for the council or their residents insocial housing. Of those who are active, there is little evidence of authorities taking a comprehensiveapproach to tackling climate change across the relevant areas of local council control. There has been littleanalysis to date of the quality of practice in most—that is, non-exemplar—authorities and regions.

See also answer to question 1.


15. It is clear, both from existing literature on the subject and the research conducted for Green Alliance’sreport, Changing places, that there is a continuing need for more, and more eVective, support and help forlocal authorities to develop the skills and capacity needed to make an eVective contribution to tacklingclimate change.

16. Carbon trading, new planning and building regulations, energy service companies, adaptation andmeasuring carbon emissions are a few of the critical areas that will require new skills and competencies.Policy developments mean that local authorities will need to acquire these skills in the very near future: forexample, the new climate change planning policy statement sends a very strong and clear signal about thecentral importance of climate change to planning; and the carbon reduction commitment, the new energycap-and-trade scheme, will catch the larger authorities.

17. We recommend that the government work with organisations, such as the Local GovernmentAssociation, the Academy for Sustainable Communities and the Sustainable Development Commission todeliver the skills strategy outlined in the local government white paper. Agencies such as the Energy SavingTrust, the Carbon Trust and the Improvement and Development Agency will also be important contributorsto the up-skilling of local authority staV, and will need resources proportional to the challenge they face.

January 2008


Memorandum submitted by the Association of British Insurers

Summary

1. Dealing with the challenge of climate change requires a Government-wide strategy with clear andtransparent allocation of responsibilities. National targets and leadership for both mitigation andadaptation need to be supported by local empowerment.

2. There should be a national framework which avoids organisational confusion and maximises thecoordination between dealing with the causes and tackling the consequences of climate change.

3. The management of flood risk shows the importance of eVective joined–up decision making across thediVerent layers of Government. As seen during the floods in Summer 2007, insuYcient clarity over roles andresponsibilities can lead to adverse consequences.

4. Local Authorities need to receive suYcient support in order to ensure the correct implementation ofclimate change policies and regulatory measures.

Introduction

5. The Association of British Insurers (ABI) represents nearly 400 member companies, which betweenthem provide 94% of the UK’s domestic insurance. It works on behalf of the UK insurance industry to keepstandards high and to make its voice heard.

6. Climate Change is a challenge that requires well thought through and coordinated work at all levelsof Government. The ABI has been leading the debate on the need to adapt to, as well as mitigate the causesof climate change. Our work on flood risk management has provided us with a unique insight into howdisconnected the various authorities are and what needs to happen to tackle this challenge.

National Targets and Leadership Supporting Local Empowerment

7. The ABI welcomes the national mitigation targets as set out in the Climate Change Bill, but a similarapproach needs to be taken for adaptation. National targets are important for certainty and transparency,but they should not discourage more ambitious local, regional or devolved targets.

8. Policy makers at national and devolved level must set out a long-term and eVective climate changemanagement strategy, providing the framework within which local and regional bodies can develop theirown individual response to the specific local climate threats.

9. There is a need to integrate the myriad codes, both statutory and voluntary, so that a single referenceis produced, providing clarity to decision makers. A good example for this is the developers’ checklist,launched in 2005.31 This guidance document attempts to pull together many of the factors that should beconsidered, drawing on a wide range of stakeholder views. It is a significant step towards a coherent guideto tackling climate change in the built environment by flagging up the issues to be addressed and suggestingsolutions.

Clear Responsibilities—The Case of Flood Risk Management

10. In June 2007 we published the insurance industry’s manifesto for adaptation, entitled “Adapting toour changing climate: a manifesto for business, government and the public”,32 which sets out how the UKcan best prepare itself today for the impacts of climate change tomorrow. The manifesto clearly identifiesthe diVerent policy areas aVected by climate change and the responsible government bodies in charge ofdriving policy development. A clear structure and framework is essential to avoid the myriad of bodiesinvolved in the policy-making becoming a barrier to progress.

11. The ABI has assessed the case of flood management and following the June and July 2007 floods,published its own recommendations for addressing this issue.33 The floods demonstrated the need for floodrisk management to be properly coordinated, covering all sources of flooding.

12. The current piecemeal approach to flood management cannot continue. There are currently too manyorganisations, each with too many competing priorities, to be able to give the fight against flooding the focusthat it deserves.

13. No single body is charged with preventing and managing flooding even though drains, sewers andrivers all contribute to flood risks. For example, while river and coastline flooding is under the responsibilityof the Environment Agency (EA), drainage is in the hands of Local Authorities, water on main roads is the

31 Adapting to climate change: a checklist for development. South East Climate Change Partnership, Sustainable DevelopmentRoundtable for the East of England, London Climate Change Partnership, 2005.

32 ABI: Adaptation Manifesto, June 2007.33 ABI: Summer Floods 2007: Learning the Lessons, November 2007.


remit of the Highways Agency and Local Authorities and private water companies are responsible for sewerflooding. As seen during the floods in summer 2007, the various authorities involved often have conflictingpriorities.

14. While one national body needs to be given overall responsibility for the fight against flooding, thisshould not mean unnecessary centralisation or national control. Instead, this national body needs to leadresearch to assess flood risk and work in partnership with the other necessary agencies to develop a holisticapproach and national framework to reduce risk.

15. In particular, it is important that this national body works closely with regional Government OYces,the OYce of Water Services, Local Authorities and resident groups to ensure that the national frameworkreflects local needs and can be delivered locally.

16. We therefore propose that the EA is given a statutory objective to deliver the adaptation target offlood risk management. This would include reducing flood risk and making the Agency the nationalcoordinator for the identification, assessment and mitigation of flood risk from all sources, includingdrainage.

The Importance of Building Regulations and Adequate Planning Policy

17. An integrated climate change strategy needs to be implemented coherently across national, regionaland local boundaries. Adaptation and mitigation need to go hand in hand and both require clear signalsprovided through regulation.

18. Mitigation policies must complement adaptation and development. For example, planting forests tosequester carbon can also stabilise soils and avoid floods, rural electrification can support sustainabledevelopment, and planting trees can reduce urban heat-island eVects. Building design must tackle bettertemperature modulation without resorting to energy dependent systems.

19. The most eYcient way to avoid creating new flood risk is to stop building in high flood risk areas. Iffor some reason development is needed in high flood risk areas, higher minimum standards should beapplied to the building to design-in features to protect it from flooding and minimise the impact of flooding:applying the routine national standards is not suYcient in high-risk areas. We welcome the introductionof PPS25 and also of the Planning Policy Statement on Climate Change, but we are concerned that LocalAuthorities continue not to apply theses policies accurately.

20. To facilitate informed local decisions at a local level and to minimise the need for Governmentintervention, the EA should provide support to Local Authorities to help them ensure that their planningoYcials have the right tools and expertise to make accurate judgements on flood risk.

21. For those buildings or redevelopments that do take place in high risk areas, higher minimumstandards in Building Regulations should apply to reduce the risk: addressing vulnerabilities to flooddamage by strengthening building codes, infrastructure performance and technological resilience. While thenew Code for Sustainable Homes goes some way to tackling this issue, it is particularly insuYcient fordevelopments in high-risk areas. For example, it should give resilience features equal weighting with energyand water eYciency in planning decisions and building standards; it should be made a statutoryrequirement; and its rating system should be more transparent and robust.

January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Waste & Resources Action Programme

Our response focuses on the climate change benefits of recycling and waste minimisation activities, andsuggests that these should be considered as an important element of the response of local, regional anddevolved governments to the challenge of climate change.

Introduction to WRAP

1. WRAP (the Waste & Resources Action Programme) is a-not-for profit UK company providingrecycling and resource eYciency programmes for Defra, the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly andthe Northern Ireland Assembly. The organisation was formed in 2000 to implement a number of the actionsset out in the Government White Paper Waste Strategy 2000.34

34 Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000), Waste Strategy 2000 for England and Wales, Parts 1 &2, Cm 4693–1 & 2, London: Stationery OYce.


2. WRAP works in partnership to encourage and enable businesses and consumers to be more eYcientin their use of materials, and to recycle more things more often. This helps to divert waste from landfill,reduce carbon emissions and improve our environment.

3. WRAP’s programmes encompass a wide variety of activities of relevance to local, regional anddevolved government. We were originally set up to develop end-markets for recycled materials, so that thelarge amounts of additional material to be collected by local authorities (in order to meet the statutoryrecycling targets in Waste Strategy 2000) could be put to productive use. Developing high-value end-marketsin this way also provides economic support to local authorities’ recycling operations, by providing them withan income (from the sale of the recyclate to waste reprocessors), where previously that waste represented acost to them (to send it to landfill).

4. We are responsible for the national Recycle Now advertising campaign, which provides localauthorities with tailored communications materials for local campaigns, tied into the national messages. Inaddition, WRAP supports local authorities directly in their work to deliver better recycling services andmore waste reduction in a cost-eVective way. Our Recycling and Organics Technical Advisory Team(ROTATE) provides practical advice to local authorities. WRAP also provides training courses to developskills and increase knowledge for those working in waste management in local, regional and devolvedgovernments.

5. We also work with the Regional Development Agencies across England to integrate marketdevelopment activity into their programmes. And in addition, we work with the devolved governments inScotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, delivering services to each which reflect their diVering priorities anddelivery mechanisms.

The Contributions of Waste Minimisation and Recycling to Climate Change Mitigation

6. WRAP agrees with the Committee that local, regional and devolved governments have an importantrole to play in the reduction of CO2 emissions. We applaud the cross-sectoral initiatives already under way,such as the Nottingham Declaration.

7. However, there is a danger that our discussions about the actions that public bodies can take to combatclimate change focus exclusively on the most obvious areas, such as energy eYciency. We would encouragea wider view, looking at all the functions of such bodies, and the extent to which they can contribute to thefight against climate change.

8. Waste management is one of the most commonly recognised functions of local authorities. Theregional and devolved governments also have important responsibilities for waste issues. All of these provideopportunities to mitigate climate change.

Waste minimisation

9. The top rung of the waste hierarchy is waste minimisation or waste reduction, where actions are takento stop waste from arising in the first place. Given that, on average, one tonne of finished product requiresthe extraction from the ground of around ten tonnes of material,35 the material savings to be made throughwaste minimisation are obvious. However, what is perhaps less obvious is the embedded energy associatedwith finished products—in other words, the energy it took to produce them—and the potential that wasteminimisation has to save this embedded energy.

10. As an example, the manufacture of 1 tonne of primary aluminium requires 55 gigajoules (15,400kilowatt hours) of energy.36 Now if, through waste minimisation activities (such as eco-design), the lifetimeof an aluminium product could be doubled, this would cut the waste of embedded energy by 50% over thelifetime of the new, longer-life product.

11. WRAP has worked with 112 local authorities in England and Scotland to provide over 1.6 millionhome composting bins since 2004. As a result, more than one third of English and Scottish households arenow composting at home, thanks in part to WRAP support. And each person who composts at home savesnot only the embedded energy in the compost they would have otherwise had to buy commercially, but alsoavoids the emissions of methane (a greenhouse gas 23 times more powerful than CO2) that their organicwaste would have generated in a landfill site.

35 See, for example, The Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food: Facing the Future (Defra, 2002), page 11 (in relation tofood production).

36 Dahlstrom, K, Ekins, P, et al (2004) Iron, Steel and Aluminium in the UK: Material flows and their economic dimensions.Policy Studies Institute, London and Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, available from:www.psi.org.uk/publications/archivepdfs/environment/finalprojectreport.pdf


Recycling

12. In May 2006, WRAP published Environmental Benefits of Recycling,37 a specialist review ofinternational studies which shows how increased recycling is helping to tackle climate change. The reportshows that in the vast majority of cases, the recycling of materials has greater environmental benefits thanincineration or landfill.

13. The UK’s current recycling of these materials saves 18 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent greenhousegases per year, compared to applying the current mix of landfill and incineration with energy recovery tothe same materials. This is equivalent to about 14% of the annual CO2 emissions from the transport sector38

and equates to taking 5 million cars oV UK roads.39

14. The message of this 2006 study is unequivocal. Recycling is good for the environment, saves energy,reduces raw material extraction and combats climate change. It has a vital role to play as waste and resourcestrategies are reviewed to meet the challenges posed by European Directives, as well as in moving the UKtowards more sustainable patterns of consumption and production, and in combating climate change byreducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Conclusion

15. In conclusion, we would argue that a strong focus on sustainable waste management by local,regional and devolved governments, which prioritises waste minimisation and recycling in line with thewaste hierarchy, will contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions significantly, and should therefore bea priority for all such bodies as an important part of their climate change mitigation strategies.

3 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by eaga plc

Background

eaga plc welcomes the opportunity to respond to the call for evidence on “Climate change and local,regional and devolved government”.

In order to put our comments into context, it may be helpful to briefly outline our role in the provisionof services across the UK.

eaga has worked with Government and local authorities to help fight fuel poverty for over 17 years. Weprovide services, products and solutions that address the social, environmental and energy eYciencyobjectives of Government and the private sector throughout the UK, as well as in North America, Indiaand the Republic of Ireland. The largest provider of residential energy eYciency solutions in the UK, eagaare a majority employee-owned plc working for Defra, Welsh Assembly Government, Department forSocial Development, Utilities and Local Authorities in managing the delivery of fuel poverty/energyeYciency programmes. We fit or repair a central heating system every minute of every working day, anddeliver improvements in over 1,000 UK homes daily. To date we have delivered assistance to over 5 millionvulnerable households in the United Kingdom through the installation of heating and insulation measures.

eaga also fully support Government’s policy on Energy Performance Certificates, and believe this policyto be a significant development in the promotion of energy eYciency. Through our UK-wide network ofhome assessors, we have seventeen years’ experience assessing the energy eYciency of households andproviding valuable energy advice. We have a team of around 500 people dedicated to this, and, to date, wehave 60 accredited EPC assessors and counting. This team is currently involved with delivering 5,400 EPCsin the social sector.

As well as our energy eYciency and social commitment, we are committed to helping the environmentand combating climate change. eaga Renewables provide renewable energy solutions for private and socialhousing, specifically through the installation of solar thermal panels. This work is carried out in the entirehousing market, both with private-funded work and public-funded work. For example, eaga Renewablesand eaga Social Housing Services are currently working on a large-scale installation of solar-thermalsystems for Birmingham City Council.

37 WRAP (2006) Environmental Benefits of Recyclinghttp://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Recycling LCA Report Sept 2006 - Final.492V242.pdf

38 Defra (2007) Waste Strategy for England 2007http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/strategy/strategy07/pdf/waste07-strategy.pdf

39 WRAP (2007) WRAP’s Review for 2006–07. Waste, Society and Climate Change—Making a DiVerence.http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/2007Achievements Report.4529afe9.pdf


Further to this, the independent Eaga Partnership Charitable Trust (Eaga-PCT) is a grant–giving trustthat currently supports projects and research in two main areas: the relief of fuel poverty and the promotionof energy eYciency; and vulnerable consumers with multiple needs and preferences. Since 1993, eaga hasgiven over £3.1 million to the Charitable Trust to distribute grants.

Specific Questions from the Consultation

Below are eaga’s responses to the questions raised by the call for evidence. Where a question is asked inthe call for evidence and not answered below, eaga has no views.


The current consultation on the future of the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 is a positive step inrevising the Government’s role in supporting local and regional climate change action. Should the Act berepealed Local Authorities (LAs) will no longer be required to spend time reporting on work in their areasto central government in a fashion which has not generated data or results of material benefit to the fightagainst climate change. Instead the resources consumed in producing these reports (often simply reportingon the work of national schemes such as Warm Front or other agencies as opposed to those initiated by theLA) could be better used on taking pro-active steps on mitigation and adaptation.

Additionally, revised Local Area Agreements specifying with greater clarity the climate change objectivesof LAs (meaningfully tied to those of central government) and in particular the powers they have to achievethem would reduce the possibility of ‘buck passing’ between local and central government on this vital issue.


The numerous mission statements and goals given by the devolved administrations, LAs and regionalgovernments in their statements on addressing environmental concerns and climate change haveconsiderable overlap and consistency. Thanks to the strong lead taken by Central Government in recentyears, this consistency has increased and led to a increasingly clear picture on the general roles of thesebodies. However, in terms of the detailed contributions each currently makes and intends to make, there isconsiderably less clarity.

The Nottingham Declaration has served an extremely function in providing a framework for LAs tostructure their role and goals in terms of combating climate change. However, as there is no formalmonitoring process and all steps of the declaration are voluntary, it produces no useful measurement of LAperformance in this area. LAs have the freedom to set their own targets for delivery of Declaration’s goals,but again these have no statutory basis and reporting is voluntary. The quantity and quality of actions takenand required by these bodies, particularly LAs’, still lacks definition, and the signing of the Declaration hasnot led to a uniform adoption of strategies or actions for delivery.

Co-ordinating and monitoring the steps these bodies are taking to meet these goals would requireextensive and consistent reporting. The experience of HECA and its proposed repeal oVers valuable lessonsin this area.


More clarity on what eVective powers are held by the devolved administrations, regional governmentsand LAs to combat climate change would be useful in enabling them to achieve their nationalGovernment’s goals.

There remains a troubling level of uncertainty in the relationship between LAs and regional bodies interms of responsibility for climate change action. As there is presently very little regional accountability foraction and a lack of certainty regarding the role of regional bodies, what remains is the direction providedby central Government. In terms of nationally delivered programmes such as Warm Front, greater regionaland local involvement and support is desirable to ensure greatest penetration of communities.

We believe the new performance indicators are specific and demanding enough to produce eVective actionfrom LAs if they are measured and reported on eVectively. However, it is vital that there is a standardmethod for recording and reporting progress if they are to deliver worthwhile carbon reductions.



The Committee on Climate Change will provide a unique forum to explore potential policy and voiceindependent suggestions to the Government.

As the Committee will be made up of experts in the sciences related to climate change and will be advisingGovernment on national policy, it would be inappropriate to attempt to also have it represent other specificinterests or stakeholders, including LAs or regional bodies.

9 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Nottingham Declaration Partnership

1.1 Launched in October 2000 in Nottingham, the Nottingham Declaration has now been signed by morethan 280 (72%) English councils. All Scottish and Welsh councils have signed their own version. Councilsthat sign the Declaration make a commitment to, “within two years, develop plans with their partners andlocal communities to progressively address the causes and the impacts of climate change”. The value of theDeclaration has been to commit senior council management, both leaders and Chief Executives, to takeaction on climate change. A copy of the Declaration is attached.

1.2 The Declaration is underpinned by a unique Partnership of all of the key bodies that support localauthority action on climate change.40 While the partner organisations support local authorities throughtheir own programmes, by working together we aim to add value by oVering a focal point for action bycouncils and a “one-stop-shop” for guidance and support across all aspects of climate change.

1.3 The Partnership currently provides: marketing campaigns to attract new signatories; on-line guidancefor local authorities on adaptation and mitigation; an on-line user forum; and occasional email updates forsignatories.

1.4 At present the Partnership is an informal arrangement. It does not receive any direct funding and isentirely supported by ad hoc partner contributions. We are currently reviewing this arrangement andconsidering whether to institute a more formal structure. We also aspire to place the Partnership on a moresecure footing by obtaining dedicated funding.

Q2. How eVective has the Nottingham Declaration process been? How can the accountability and transparencyof the response at a local level be improved?

1.5 The Nottingham Declaration Partnership (NDP) believe that the Declaration has been very succesfulin mobilising local authority action on climate change. In the absence of a mechanism to embed climatechange within local authority performance frameworks (until the Local Government Bill proposals in late2006), there was no national driver to ensure climate change was addressed at the highest levels in localauthorities. The Declaration therefore gained a high profile with councils as a focal point for action.

1.6 The key role of the Declaration in driving action is supported by empirical evidence. A survey of localauthorities comissioned by the LGA Climate Change Commission found that 84% of local authorities thathave or are developing a climate change stategy believed that signing the Nottingham Declaration was a keydriver. Similarly, a recent survey by the Energy Saving Trust (EST) found that 80% of respondents believedthat signing the Declaration helped to build member and senior oYcer momentum within the council.

1.7 Since the formation of the partnership, a top priority has been to increase the number of signatories.Turning councils’ commitment into action is, however, clearly key. In its recent report41 the LGA ClimateChange Commission argued that:

The Nottingham Declaration has no formal status in terms of ability to monitor council progress,gather data or hold councils to account. If it is to remain the focus of good practice amongstcouncils it must be strengthened.

1.8 We agree with the Commission that the time has come to be more robust in assessing howcommitments convert into eVective action. However, the Partnership also recognises that it has no formalrole in holding councils to account and that the task of monitoring council progress is the domain ofgovernment, the Audit Commission and other relevant inspectorates. As an alternative we are exploring thefeasibility of introducing a new voluntary Nottingham Declaration accreditation scheme.

1.9 As explained in our answer to question 3 below, we believe that an accreditation scheme wouldcomplement and strengthen the new local performance framework by:

1. Encouraging all signatories to put in place essential mechanisms for improving their performanceon climate change.

40 The Environment Agency, Carbon Trust, energy saving trust, ICLEI, I&DeA, Local Government Association, NottinghamCity Council, UK Climate Impacts Programme.

41 A Climate of Change, LGA Climate Change Commission, December 2008.


2. Helping to strengthen the Audit Commission’s assessment of adaptation and mitigation withinComprehensive Area Assessments.

3. Raising the public visibility of councils’ response to climate change.

1.10 Accreditation would provide assurance that signing the Declaration has led to eVective action. Akey aim would be to bring weaker performing local authorities up to a minimum standard, but we wouldalso aim to encourage signatories to continue to stretch their performance.

1.11 Consequently we are considering a graded accreditation. To achieve the lowest level, localauthorities would be expected to demonstrate that they have met the Declaration’s commitment to adopt aclimate change action plan that satisfactorily addresses both adaptation and mitigation. Higher levels woulddemand convincing evidence of improving performance.

1.12 We believe that an accreditation scheme would help to strengthen the Audit Commission’sassessment of adaptation and mitigation responses within Area Risk Assessments. An accreditation schemewould thus be complementary to the formal performance framework assessment process. We are currentlydiscussing our proposals within the partnership with a view to discussions with the Audit Commission.

Q3. Does there need to be a more explicit reference to climate change in the local government performanceframework and will the new performance indicators on climate change be enough to stimulate action?

1.13 The NDP welcomes the introduction of three climate change performance indicators (PI) within thelocal performance framework. This is an essential first step and for the first time drives climate change intothe heart of local government.

1.14 However, performance management is subject to the pressures of competing demands and it isimportant that councils have the freedom to respond to local priorities. With 198 national indicatorscompeting for attention, the inclusion of a handful on climate change cannot guarantee action. It is thereforevital that all organisations that support councils in improving performance reinforce the centrality ofclimate change.

1.15 Although some local areas may well include improvement targets around climate change withintheir Local Area Agreements (LAAs), we do not anticipate that all local areas will commit to improvementson both adaptation and mitigation. Therefore it is important to reinforce action in other ways. It is our beliefthat the Audit Commission’s Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) presents the best opportunity forstrengthening councils’ response, reinforced by support from Government OYces, CLG, Defra and the NDpartners.

1.16 In recent months the Audit Commission has demonstrated a growing commitment to addressingclimate change within its assessments. For example, its recent consultation on the Use of ResourcesAssessment42 states that it will consider how well the authority is “tackling climate change” [in its use ofresources].

1.17 We believe that an ND accreditation scheme would help, by providing the Commission with easilyrecognisable evidence of how well a local authority is responding to adaptation and mitigation.

Q10. What good practice is there to be shared? How is best practice shared and does central governmentsupport for sharing best practice work? What role should UK Climate Impacts Programme, IDeA, SalixFinance, the Carbon Trust and Energy Saving Trust play in providing support?

1.18 Although there is a growing range of advice and support for local authorities on climate change, itis scattered across a variety of agencies and is not always easily found by its target audience. The goal of thePartnership is to provide a “one-stop-shop” to advise on both adaptation and mitigation.

1.19 In April 2008 we will launch a much improved Nottingham Declaration website. Our intention isthat the website will become a “one-stop-shop” for local authorities seeking advice on climate change and:

— act as a portal to all available advice and support for local authorities on both adaptation andmitigation;

— include the latest news on climate change as well as information designed specifically for ElectedMembers and service managers;

— draw on the experience of the Partners to identify good practice and then signpost signatories tothat good practice; and

— become a living site that is continuously updated.

1.20 We also have aspirations to:

— commission new case studies and guidance where there are obvious gaps for particular localauthority services; and

42 Use of Resources 2009, CAA consultation, Audit Commission, November 2007.


— complement the website with other dissemination methods such as training programmes anddigital newsletters.

1.21 However, our capacity to maintain an up-to-date website, implement an accreditation scheme, andprogress other initiatives, will inevitably depend on the resources that are available to the Partnership.

11 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Environment Agency

Summary

The Environment Agency welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the Environmental AuditCommittee’s inquiry into “Climate Change and Local, Regional and Devolved Government”. Our responseis focussed on climate change adaptation only.

Every region and local authority will be aVected by climate change. The 2007 summer floods, the 2004–06drought and the 2003 heatwave, have shown how climatic events can have a major impact on households,businesses, critical infrastructure (such as roads, railways, water treatment works or electricity generation)and vulnerable sections of society (such as the poor or elderly), as well as having a major economic impact.

Climate change will pose a direct risk to regional agencies, local authorities and devolved government andwill aVect the exercise of their functions and the delivery of their services. However, by adapting to climatechange in a timely manner they will be in a stronger position to fulfil their remit both now and in the future.

Unfortunately, the response by regional agencies and local authorities has, to date, been patchy. Despiteseemingly good levels of activity—such as signing up to the Nottingham Declaration—the response has notbeen consistent, nor has it been co-ordinated, with considerable variation in the quality of outcomes.

The Environment Agency believes Government should clarify the diVering roles and responsibilitiesplayed by regional agencies and local authorities in delivering climate change adaptation, whilst alsoensuring there is an imperative to co-operate and deliver a co-ordinated response. We believe that regionsare best placed to take the strategic lead on climate change, with local authorities taking the lead ondelivering well-adapted communities and places.

Key Recommendations

Government should:

1. Place a new duty on Regional Planning Bodies to address climate change mitigation and adaptationin the development of Regional Spatial Strategies (or their replacements) as part of the Planning Bill, similarto the proposed Clause 147 that places this duty on local authorities.

2. Develop clear statutory guidance to regions and local authorities on how to respond to the UK RiskReport and their role in the delivery of the UK Adaptation Policy Programme as part of the ClimateChange Bill.

3. In taking forward the Sub National Review, place a statutory duty on Regional Development Agenciesto contribute to sustainable development, including specific reference to climate change as well as ensuringthat new Single Regional Strategies have an overarching objective to tackle climate change, includingspecific reference to climate change adaptation.

4. Ensure that every local authority can demonstrate they have addressed climate change adaptation inaccordance with Level 1 or 2 of the “Adapting to Climate Change” indicator (as currently defined) as theminimum requirement for all local authorities to meet in the Audit Commission’s Comprehensive AreaAssessments (CAA).

5. For those Local Authorities most at risk, they should adopt the “Adapting to Climate Change”indicator in their Local Area Agreement and be required to meet Levels 3 or 4 (as currently defined).

6. Increase regional and local capacity for technical advice and support on climate change adaptation,such as the Nottingham Declaration Partnership, Regional Climate Change Partnerships and UKCIP.

7. Rigorously implement climate change planning policy, including “Planning Policy Statement:Planning & Climate Change—Supplement to PPS1” and “Planning Policy Statement 25: Development &Flood Risk”.


1. Introduction

1.1 The Environment Agency welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the Environmental AuditCommittee’s inquiry into “Climate Change and Local, Regional and Devolved Government”.

1.2 The Environment Agency is the public body for protecting and improving the environment inEngland and Wales. We work across all levels of government, with dedicated staV located at regional andlocal area levels as well as in Wales.

1.3 Climate Change is a priority theme in our Corporate Strategy and we play a major role in managingthe UK’s response to climate change. As well as regulating about 45% of greenhouse gas emissions inEngland and Wales, we are the leading public body on climate change adaptation, with a focus on flood riskmanagement, strategic coastal management, water scarcity and drought, and conserving freshwaterbiodiversity.

1.4 Our response is focused on adaptation issues only and is in the following four parts:

— Review of climate change impacts and risks and the response by regions and local authorities(Questions 5 and 7).

— Changes in the statutory framework and opportunities to strengthen delivery on climate change.(Questions 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8).

— Specific adaptation issues (flooding, water resources, waste).

— Conclusions (future roles of regions and local authorities, capacity building) (Questions 5 and 10).

2. Review of Climate Change Impacts and Risks and the Response by Regions and Local Authorities(Questions 5 and 7)

Climate Change Impacts on Regions and Local Authorities

2.1 The impacts of climate change will be felt across the country, in every region and every local authority.The risks and vulnerabilities associated with these impacts will vary across the country depending on localcircumstances however. For instance a heat wave may be intensified in urban areas by the urban heat islandeVect, or an England-wide drought may aVect the south east of the country more than other parts due toits catchment hydrology and socio-economics. The steep valley catchment in Boscastle contributed to thedevastating flooding during 2004. DiVerences between regional and local circumstances mean that manyadaptation strategies need regional and/or local responses.43

2.2 The 2007 summer floods, the 2004–06 drought and the 2003 heatwave, have shown how climaticevents can have a major impact on households, businesses, critical infrastructure (such as roads, railways,water treatment works or electricity generation)and vulnerable sections of society (such as the poor orelderly), as well as having a major economic impact. While scientifically none of these events can yet beattributed to climate change, we know that under future scenarios these types of events are likely to becomemore frequent and more severe.44 For example, the summer temperatures of 2003, which caused deaths,road melting and other infrastructure damage, will be typical by 2030.45

2.3 Climate change will pose a direct risk to regional agencies, local authorities and the Welsh AssemblyGovernment and will aVect the exercise of their functions and the delivery of their services. By adapting toclimate change in a timely manner they will be in a stronger position to fulfil their remit both now and inthe future.

2.4 Adapting to climate change involves:

— reducing the risks, from both the slower changes in climate (average temperatures rises) andsudden changes (heat waves, storms, flash flooding);

— focusing on vulnerabilities;

— improving capacity to respond; and

— making the most of the opportunities.

Risks and Vulnerability to Regions and Local Authorities

2.5 The Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and the English Regions—comprising RegionalDevelopment Agencies, Regional Assemblies and Government OYces—have a central role to play indelivering a number of Public Service Agreement targets and currently have a strategic responsibility foreconomic development, transport, housing and spatial planning, including regeneration and the

43 A more detailed examination of regional impacts can be found in the scoping studies produced by each English Region inpartnership with the UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP), as well as a number of local studies, such as the Adaptationon the Wear project, which examined impacts across a river catchment.

44 UKCIP02 Scenarios.45 Met OYce.


environment. In England, these are currently delivered through two statutory regional strategies—theRegional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) and in Wales by the WalesSpatial Plan and other devolved powers. Climate change poses a significant risk to their successful delivery.

2.6 In terms of economic development, climate change will impact on specific business and industrialsectors in diVering and complex ways, depending on the type of business and the vulnerability of their supplychains. Regional economic performance will also be aVected by the extent to which businesses have prepared“business continuity” plans to enable them to operate in times of major incidents, such as floods or drought.Businesses which have no such plans subsequently experience heavy financial losses. Strategies to promoteeconomic development are beginning to address these risks (see Regional Economic Strategy examplebelow).

RES Example: South West Regional Economic Strategy & Delivery Plan

Action: Deliver key actions from the South West Climate Change Strategy, including the developmentof coordinated advice on the impacts of climate change and adaptation strategies in businessplanning.

Lead Organisation: South West Climate Change Impacts Partnerships (SWCCIP)

Monitoring: Number of businesses having undertaken a risk assessment on the impacts of climatechange and subsequent actions taken.

2.7 In terms of spatial planning, climate change will have a direct impact across most areas of planningas well as on the future patterns of development in a region. It is likely to aVect transport corridors, broadlocations for housing development, design and construction standards, waste management and themanagement of the natural environment, such as flood risk management, water resource planning, wastewater treatment, green infrastructure, landscapes and conserving biodiversity. Spatial planning documentsare beginning to address these risks (see Regional Spatial Strategy example below).

RES Example: Policy CC2: Climate Change (Part 2), South East Plan

Adaptation to risks and opportunities will be achieved through:

— Guiding strategic development to locations oVering greater protection from impacts such asflooding, erosion, storms, water shortages and subsidence.

— Ensuring new and existing building stock is more resilient to climate change impacts.— Incorporating sustainable drainage measures and high standards of water eYciency in new and

existing building stock.— Increasing flood storage capacity and developing sustainable new water resources.— Ensuring that opportunities and options for sustainable flood management and migration of

habitats and species are not foreclosed.

2.8 For local authorities the strategic risks to economic development and spatial planning are broadlysimilar, although each will have more location specific issues. The added complexity for local authorities isin their delivery of services to the local community.

2.9 Many of the services and associated infrastructure provided by local authorities could be particularlyvulnerable to the impacts of climate change. This might include public sector housing, transport services,health care, social care, education, emergency services, waste management and the local environmentalmanagement of nature reserves or parks. Indicative data taken from our 2006 National Flood RiskAssessment (NaFRA) shows the extent to which critical local facilities are at risk of flooding:

Critical facilities Number of sites at risk of flooding Percentage of overall sites nos

Hospitals 90 6%Care homes 1,028 7%Schools 1,796 7%Health centres 2,971 10%Prisons 19 13%Police stations 397 13%Ambulance Stations 172 14%Fire Stations 265 14%Electricity stations 8,423 15%Railway stations 512 17%Gas supply sites 23 28%Sewage & water 1,145 58%

Source: 2006 National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA)


How are Regions and Local Authorities responding?

2.10 Unsurprisingly, local authorities, regions and WAG have responded to the rapidly rising climatechange agenda, although the activity is patchy. Notably, this includes:

— Over 280 local authorities have signed the Nottingham Declaration, 180 of which have signed upsince its re-launch in December 2005. Many of these are preparing Nottingham DeclarationAction Plans or Climate Change Action Plans or equivalents.

— All 22 Welsh unitary authorities, the three National Park Authorities and the Fire and RescueAuthorities have signed the Welsh Commitment to Address Climate Change, developed with theWelsh Assembly Government.

— The Beacon Council Scheme has recently short listed nine councils for their good practice in“Tackling climate change” (mitigation and adaptation).

— Every region has a climate change impacts scoping study, produced in conjunction with UKCIPand based on the UKCIP02 scenarios.

— Every English Region has a Regional Climate Change Partnership, which represents all the keyregional stakeholders. WAG has set up a Climate Change Commission.

— All Regional Spatial Strategies have a climate change policy and all Regional Economic Strategiesrefer to climate change.

— All English Regions and WAG have developed, or are developing, Climate Change Action Plans(or equivalent types of document)—see table below.

Regional Climate Change Action Plans—State of Play, July 2007

Reflects EA Priorities?

Is the regionpreparing a If yes, does it

Region/ CC Strategy/ include Flood WaterCountry Action Plan? Adaptation? Launch date Time scale Risk scarcity Coast Biodiversity

Yorkshire &Humber } } 2005 3–5 years } — x —

North West } } Nov 2006 2007–09 } x } x

Wales } } July 2007 2007–10 } } } }

South East } } March 2007 2006–26 } } } }

Mitigation planlaunched 2007.

London }46 } Adaptation plan due 2008 — — — —

Under developmentNorth East } — Expected March 2008 — — — —

East of Under developmentEngland } } Expected 2008 — — — —

Under developmentSouth West } } Expected 2008 — — — —

West Under developmentMidlands } — Expected 2008 — — — —

“Programme of Action”East under developmentMidlands } } Expected 2008 — — — —

2.11 However, despite seemingly good levels of activity, the response has not been consistent, nor hasit been co-ordinated, with considerable variation in the quality of outcomes. For example:

— 130 local authorities have failed to sign the Nottingham Declaration despite its launch sevenyears ago.

— For those local authorities which have signed, there is no monitoring in relation to the NottinghamDeclaration or any “quality control” on the Action Plans they are committed to developing.

— 80% of respondents to a Local Government Analysis and Research survey said that overall, in theiropinion, their local authority had been not very eVective, or not at all eVective, in adapting toclimate change;47

— Few, if any, of the climate change strategies prepared by local authorities seem to consider climatechange adaptation and, where it is discussed, the actions tend to be weak.48

46 The Mayor of London launched an Action Plan in Feb 2007 but is developing a separate Adaptation Plan for London. TheCity Of London (as a Local Authority) also has its own Adaptation Strategy.

47 LGA (2007) “A Climate of Change”, LGA Climate Change Commission, December 2007.48 LGA (2007) “Review of Local Government Action on Climate change”, Tyndall Centre Study for the LGA Climate Change

Commission, February 2007.


— Regional Climate Change Partnerships vary in their scope and focus, with uncertainties in long-term funding hindering eVective delivery.49

— Regional Climate Change Action Plans (or equivalents) vary in scope, often sitting outside thestatutory framework, with limited or no additional funding. It is unclear at this stage how eVectivethey will be in delivering on adaptation.

— While some individual climate change policies in Regional Spatial Strategies are good, most havefailed to significantly influence RSSs towards being either well-adapted or environmentallysustainable.50

— While Regional Economic Strategies often mention climate change, Regional DevelopmentAgencies have not paid suYcient attention to the economic risks posed by climate change impacts,preferring to focus on mitigation and the development of environmental technologies such asrenewables.51

2.12 We acknowledge that some of these issues are historical, for example the lack of any duty orincentive for regions or local authorities to address climate change (and adaptation in particular) or the“complexity” and “confusion” of regional accountability arrangements.52

2.13 We also acknowledge that some significant steps have been made to improve this situation, such asthe forthcoming Climate Change Bill; a new duty on Local Government to address climate change in thePlanning Bill; a new Local Performance Indicator on Adapting to Climate Change (NI188); the PPS1Supplement on Climate Change and Planning; and the intention to clarify roles and responsibilities at theregional level by delivering the recommendations of the Sub-National Review. The implication of theseinitiatives for regions and local authorities is discussed in the next section.

3. Changes in the Statutory Framework and Opportunities to Strengthen Delivery on ClimateChange (Questions 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8)

3.1 There are a number of significant changes to the national statutory framework which will impact onthe future roles and responsibilities of regions and local authorities in delivering on climate changeadaptation.

Climate Change Bill

3.2 The Climate Change Bill, currently before the House of Lords, is a major piece of UK legislation aswell as being groundbreaking internationally. In terms of climate change adaptation, the Bill willconsiderably strengthen the statutory framework. In addition to its proposals for statutory emissionsreduction targets and carbon budgeting, the Government will now have a duty to produce, every five years,a national assessment of climate change risks, and an Adaptation Policy Programme.

3.3 Whilst we warmly welcome the Bill there are areas where we feel it should be strengthened. Inparticular the Bill should place a duty on all public bodies to take into account future climate change impactswhen exercising their functions. The Secretary of State should also have a power to require specific bodies,such as those responsible for managing critical services (including local authorities) to undertake a climatechange risk assessment for their planning and investments, and to identify an action plan to address the risks.This would eVectively apply the concepts of the Civil Contingencies Act to cover climate change.

3.4 If the Adaptation Policy Programme is to be eVective, the impacts for regions and local authoritiesshould be significant. The compiling of the UK Risk Report will require considerable input from bothregional and local authorities, and it will therefore be essential for those bodies to be able to understand andact on those risks. Regions and local authorities will also play a key role in the delivery of the AdaptationPolicy Programme, due in 2011. It will be crucial for regions and local authorities to have clear guidancefrom Government on their role in this. This could be through Statutory Guidance, performance indicatorsor explicit duties.

PPS1 Supplement on Climate Change

3.5 We warmly welcome the PPS1 Supplement on Climate Change and have been working closely withthe Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) on its development. In response to theconsultation on the PPS1 Supplement we recommended:

— Greater emphasis on the role of spatial planning in encouraging greater water eYciency andhelping to deliver the “twin-track” approach to water resources (demand management as well assupply side measures).

49 Letter from the UK Inter-Regional Climate Change Coordinators Group (UKIRCCG) to Ian Pearson MP, 30 March 2007.50 WWF, CPRE, FoE (2007) “How Green Is My Region?”, July 2007.51 Regional Development Agencies (2007), “Tackling Climate Change in the Regions”, June 2007.52 HMT (2007) “Review of Sub-National Economic Development and Regeneration” HMT, BERR, CLG, July 2007.


— The need for a national vulnerability analysis or assessment to inform long term national, regionaland local spatial plans.

— Stronger requirement for spatial plans to include adaptation objectives that will be monitored andreviewed in a similar way to mitigation objectives.

— Greater emphasis on improving the resource eYciency of non-residential buildings andinfrastructure.

— More encouragement for techniques that help existing buildings and the environment to adapt tothe eVects of climate change eg Sustainable Drainage and enhancing multi-purpose open spaces(green infrastructure).

— Carbon emission yardsticks, trajectories or targets to be referred to when making developmentdecisions.

The PPS1 Supplement has gone some way to addressing most of these recommendations.

Planning Bill

3.6 The Planning Bill, which is currently before the House of Commons, proposes an amendment to thePlanning and Compulsory Purchase Act (PCPA) 2004 in which “Development plan documents must (takenas a whole) include policies designed to secure that the development and use of land in the local planningauthority’s area contributes to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change”.53

3.7 This clause is warmly welcomed—essentially placing a duty on local planning authorities, whenpreparing their local development plan documents, to include policies which take action on mitigating andadapting to climate change. The amendment is set within the section of the PCPA 2004 which states that inpreparing a local development document, local planning authorities must have regard to national policiesand advice contained in statutory guidance, such as the Planning Policy Statement 1: Supplement onClimate Change. We would also highlight that subsequent statutory guidance would also be relevant,including any issued in relation to the Climate Change Bill.

3.8 However, we note that the Planning Bill fails to include a similar amendment requiring regionalplanning documents (currently Regional Spatial Strategies) to also address climate change. We believe thatthis is amiss, and would recommend Government tables a similar amendment to Section 5(3) of the PCPA2004, which details the guidance Regional Planning Bodies should have regard to in the preparation of RSS.This would eVectively place a duty on the Regional Planning Body to ensure future iterations of RSSs (orsubsequent regional planning documents, namely Single Regional Strategies) would have to address climatechange. We do not believe that the future implementation of the Sub-National Review (see section below)should be a barrier to this.

3.9 In addition, new National Policy Statements must take full account of climate change planning policyand further Climate Change Bill commitments. In particular the location and design of NationallySignificant Infrastructure Projects should reflect future climate change impacts up until the 2080s. Thisincludes a preference for not putting infrastructure in vulnerable places (especially high flood risk areas andlocations vulnerable to coastal erosion). The new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) which will beresponsible for taking decisions on major infrastructure should be subject to a duty to contribute to theachievement of sustainable development and should be equipped to assess alternatives, with clear operatingrules and relevant environmental expertise.

Sub-National Review

3.10 In July 2007, the Government published its “Review of Sub-National Economic Development andRegeneration” or Sub-National Review (SNR). We understand that the Government is considering its plansto implement the SNR’s recommendations, with a proposed consultation in early 2008. We believe theimplementation of the Sub-National Review could oVer substantial opportunities to strengthen regional-to-local delivery of climate change adaptation but are seriously concerned by the Government’s narrowfocus on economic growth alone.

3.11 As it currently stands, we understand that the SNR proposes to implement a growth-focusedframework for regions based around a single regional economic objective. This would be complemented bygiving local authorities a new statutory duty, also towards economic development, to ensure more eVectiveregional-to-local delivery. The SNR also proposes abolishing Regional Assemblies, transferring theirpowers to Regional Development Agencies, who would then have executive responsibilities for producingthe new “Single Regional Strategy”—a merger of the Regional Spatial Strategy and Regional EconomicStrategy.

3.12 Whilst welcoming a simplification of regional accountabilities as well as the Single RegionalStrategies in principle, our concern is that the SNR reforms are focussed too narrowly on a single economicgrowth objective. If Single Regional Strategies are to combine economic and planning policy they must be

53 Clause 147, http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/planning.html


in accordance with the objectives of the planning system, which is to contribute to sustainable developmentas outlined in “Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1): Delivering Sustainable Development” and the “PPS1Supplement on Climate Change and Planning”. With Regional Development Agencies taking overallexecutive responsibilities at a regional level they must also be given a statutory duty54 to deliver sustainabledevelopment, and a specific objective on climate change (covering mitigation and adaptation).

3.13 Government must ensure the primary legislation it brings forward to implement the SNRstrengthens the statutory underpinning for regional and local government action on climate change. Failureto do so will exacerbate, rather than resolve, the existing policy conflicts between local authorities andregions.

3.14 We recommend that:

— The primary aim for Single Regional Strategies should be to achieve sustainable development.

— In addition to the economic development objective, there should be an overarching objective totackle climate change, including specific reference to climate change adaptation.

— RDAs should be given a statutory duty to deliver sustainable development, including specificreference to climate change.

— New regional scrutiny and monitoring arrangements should specifically track delivery againstclimate change.

— Regional Ministers should champion climate change action across their regions as well asnationally.

Local Performance Framework & Local Area Agreements

3.15 We warmly welcome the inclusion of a new “Adapting to Climate Change” (NI188) indicator in theLocal Performance Framework. The indicator sets out a clear four step process towards addressing climatechange risks (see box) and we contributed towards its development, alongside UKCIP and others, based onour own experience of implementing the Environment Agency’s “Organisational Adaptation Strategy”.

NI188: Adapting to Climate Change—The Four Step Process

Level 0: The authority has not assessed and managed climate risks and opportunities, or incorporatedappropriate action into local authority strategic planning.

Level 1: The authority has undertaken a comprehensive, local risk-based assessment of currentvulnerabilities to weather and climate, both now and in the future. It has developed possible adaptationresponses explicitly related to other relevant council strategies, plans, partnerships and operations (suchas planning, flood management, economic development, social care, services for children, transport, etc).

Level 2: The authority has identified the most eVective adaptation responses to address the risks andopportunities, explicitly related to other council strategies, plans and operations. This will yield a set oflocally specific, preferred options.

Level 3: The authority has developed an adaptation action plan to deliver necessary steps to achieve theexisting objectives set out in council strategies, plans, investment decisions and partnership arrangementsin light of projected climate change.

Level 4: The authority has implemented an adaptation action plan, and a process for monitoring andreview to ensure progress with each measure.

3.16 We believe that the inclusion of the indicator in the national set is a significant step towards helpinglocal authorities address climate change adaptation, which they can do in two ways under the new LocalPerformance Framework:

— Firstly, all upper tier local authorities will need to demonstrate their progress against all 198national indicators in the Local Performance Framework (including “Adapting to ClimateChange”). Progress will be assessed by the Audit Commission in annual Comprehensive AreaAssessments.

— Secondly, each local authority will negotiate a Local Area Agreement (LAA), which sets out itslocal priorities and is a binding three-year “improvement” programme agreed between nationaland local government. LAAs will be monitored against 35 priority indicators (selected from thenational set of 198 indicators). Local authorities wishing to stretch their performance onadaptation or which are at a high risk of climate change impacts, should include the “Adapting toClimate Change” indicator.

54 RDA’s currently only have a duty to deliver sustainable development “in regard to the exercise of their function”. If theirfunction is changed to deliver a single economic objective, this will clearly aVect their duty to deliver sustainable development,as defined by the Securing the Future, the UKs Sustainable Development Strategy.


3.17 However, as climate change indicators are not compulsory, our major concern is that, due to thelagging political agenda associated with climate change adaptation, only a minority of local authorities willadopt this indicator in their LAA. This being the case, there is a risk is that the majority of local authoritieswill fail to adequately respond to the adaptation agenda over the next three years. We think that climatechange adaptation is an imperative for all local authorities and should therefore be one of the 35 indicatorsincluded in most Local Area Agreements.

3.18 For those local authorities not choosing the “Adapting to Climate Change” indicator, Governmentmust find alternative routes to ensure they address climate change risks. We would suggest the following:

— Government should ensure that local authorities and Local Strategic Partnerships, when reviewingexisting Community Strategies, or in the production of new Sustainable Community Strategies,include climate change (mitigation and adaptation) as a high-level objective. This will ensurefuture work programmes, including future LAAs and Local Development Frameworks, willaddress climate change adaptation.

— The Audit Commission should set Level 1 or 2 of the “Adapting to Climate Change” indicator (ascurrently defined) as the minimum requirement for Comprehensive Area Assessments (CAA).

— The Audit Commission should seek the views of the Environment Agency, UKCIP and others onwhich local authorities we perceive to bear the greatest risks from climate change. If these “highrisk” local authorities are failing to adapt to climate change, the Audit Commission should ensurethis is highlighted in the CAA and Government should persuade the local authority to makegreater progress in this respect (eg by making Adapting to Climate Change one of the 35indicators).

— Government should consider how best to support local authorities with the delivery of theirNottingham Declaration commitments, which includes the development of an Action Plan thataddresses mitigation and adaptation, equivalent to Level 3 of the Adapting to Climate Changeindicator. This should include measures that strengthen the Nottingham Declaration and provide“quality assurances” on the implementation of commitments (see section 5.5: Capacity building).

— In preparing the UK Risk Report in 2008–09 (as outlined in the Climate Change Bill), Governmentshould draw on the evidence base collected by the Audit Commission’s first round of CAAs tojudge how well local authorities are placed to adapt and identify those local authorities which arefailing to make progress. This should act as the future baseline for assessing progress.

— In preparing the UK Adaptation Policy Programme due in 2011 (as outlined in the ClimateChange Bill) Government should draw on the experiences of forward looking local authorities—defined either by progress against the Adapting to Climate Change indicator or progress indeveloping a Nottingham Declaration Action Plan—who can advise Government on what futurenational policy is needed for local government on adaptation.

3.19 Delivering against climate change objectives will require a step change in local authorityperformance, requiring leadership from both local authority Chief Executives and Council Leaders as wellas local councillors.

3.20 In the medium term, Government should ensure that every local authority addresses climate changeadaptation in the next round of LAAs (2011–14). This would also coincide with the publication of theAdaptation Policy Programme, also due in 2011, which will require significant commitment from localauthorities for delivery. We would also support the LGA’s Climate Change Commission recommendationthat Government should impose a statutory duty on those councils that are failing to respond to climatechange.

4. Specific Adaptation Issues

In carrying out our functions, the Environment Agency works with local authorities and regions on anumber of specific issues which will be directly impacted by future climate change. Some of the key issuesincluding flooding, water resources, waste and biodiversity are highlighted below.

Flooding

4.1 We have a historical legacy of building on flood plains and the risk to these developments needs tobe managed. To avoid future problems, we need to work with regions and local authorities to avoidinappropriate development in areas at high risk of flooding and to direct development away from those areasat highest risk. Climate change will exacerbate future flood risk problems.

4.2 The 2007 Summer Floods were a major incident and were subject to a separateindependent inquiry by Sir Michael Pitt. However, our own review highlights the following policy areas inrelation to local government:

— The Environment Agency should be given the strategic overview for urban flooding from allsources which would provide the framework for local authorities and other partners to planlocally.


— Local government must take responsibility for the development and delivery of Surface WaterManagement Plans (SWMPs) that will address the issues of “urban flooding”. The EnvironmentAgency and other stakeholders, such as water companies and the Highways Agency, should workin partnerships with local authorities on the delivery of SWMPs.

— Providers of essential public services, including local authorities and electricity and watercompanies, and owners of critical infrastructure, should have a duty under the forthcomingClimate Change Bill to take account of climate change impacts when planning and providingtheir services.

4.3 The Environment Agency has also been working with local authorities and regions on theimplementation of “Planning Policy 25 (PPS25): Development and Flood Risk” since its publication inDecember 2006. Under PPS25, regions have a responsibility for preparing Regional Flood Risk Appraisals(RFRAs) to inform Regional Spatial Strategy and local authorities are responsible for preparing moredetailed Strategic Flood Risk Assessments (SFRAs) to inform Local Development Frameworks. In bothcases, PPS25 includes “contingency allowances” to incorporate future climate change impacts into planning.

4.4 Although our latest development and flood risk report (HLT5 for England) shows general success inthe implementation of PPS25, we are concerned that the requirement for flood risk assessments toaccompany planning applications is still being ignored by many developers. Furthermore local planningauthority performance in providing decision notices to the Environment Agency has deteriorated, and someplanning permissions are still being granted against flood risk advice. Local authorities and regions have acentral role to play in implementing PPS25, ensuring that long-term planning incorporates flood risk andclimate change factors, as well as ensuring individual developments to do not contribute to increasedflooding. Government must ensure the rigorous implementation of PPS25.

Strategic Coastal Management

4.5 Coastal flooding will become an increasing issue with climate change leading to rising sea levels aswell as more extreme events such as tidal and storm surges, as those seen on the east coast in November2007. PPS25, as discussed above, has a vital role to play in helping regions and local authorities plan forthis, including “contingency allowances” for coastal flood defences that incorporate sea level rise. There isalso a need to recognise that parts of some coastal communities and some coastal land will not be able tobe defended on any economic basis from encroachment of the sea.

4.6 From April 2008, the Environment Agency will assume new powers in relation to the coast, whichwill give us a strategic overview of coastal management and coastal flooding. Working with maritime localauthorities, we will ensure that the production of Shoreline Management Plans (SMP) are consistent, takeaccount of climate change and, most importantly, are fully incorporated into Local DevelopmentFrameworks.

4.7 However, we believe that there is an urgent need for a long-term Coastal Strategy which sets out theGovernment’s vision for the coast and how it plans to manage the increasing risks to businesses, property,communities, and wildlife habitats. Alongside this, Government must urgently review “PPG 20: CoastalPlanning”. This was published in 1992 and is out of date in respect of the developing evidence base on climatechange as well as the mechanisms such as SMPs. Because of its age there is a risk that it is seen by localauthorities as a low priority.

Water Resources & Housing Growth

4.8 The Environment Agency is responsible for planning long term water resources for England andWales. We are particularly concerned by plans to increase housing, especially in Growth Areas, which willadd pressure to already stretched water resources. Many growth areas, such as the Thames Gateway, arealready in areas suVering from water stress, and this will be exacerbated by future climate change.

4.9 Our research shows that too often water companies remain over reliant on supply-side measures (suchas building new reservoirs) to plan for water scarcity. However, demand-side measures, such as increasedwater eYciency and water metering, can be more eVective. Local authorities should, where supported byevidence, include higher standards for water eYciency in local Development Plan Documents andSustainable Community Strategies. The Government’s Growth Areas, and in particular the new “Eco-Towns”, must be exemplars in this respect and strive for the highest levels of water eYciency.

4.10 The new Homes and Communities Agency proposed by the current Housing and Regeneration Billshould have specific objectives to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This should take into accountthe wider impacts of new and existing housing on the natural environment as well as the need for sustainabledesign and construction.


Waste

4.11 Recent research by the Environment Agency has shown that more consideration needs to be givento make new and existing waste management facilities resilient to flooding. Planning Policy Statement 25will help us ensure this is the case for new waste management sites, while a further recommendation of theresearch is that the Environment Agency and the waste sector develop guidance to help operatorsunderstand the implications of climate change for existing sites. One of the main findings of our work wasthat good site management can greatly reduce the risks posed by climate change, hence the need forguidance.

Biodiversity

4.12 Research projects such as MONARCH have demonstrated that the “climate space” of UK speciesis changing and species that are currently at their southerly limit may disappear and those at their northerlymay potentially thrive. However, not all the key species have been mapped and even for those that have thereremains considerable uncertainty regarding which exact localities will be aVected. Government, inpartnership with Environment Agency, Natural England and other conservation bodies must work towardsa more detailed climate space mapping, including identifying opportunities to create future ecologicalnetworks, such as wetlands. Local and regional planners should incorporate these into spatial plans, withinvestment and delivery targeted to those species which are the most resilient to climate change. Work inthe South West of England on South West Nature Map is leading this area.

5. Conclusions

Future Roles and Responsibilities for Regions and Local Authorities

5.1 As we have shown, the current response from regions and local authorities to climate changeadaptation has not been adequate and the roles and responsibilities between the two have been confused andunclear. Like the other policy areas (economic development, housing, transport) identified in Government’s“Sub-National Review” (SNR), climate change has suVered from ineVectual regional-to-local collaborationand co-ordination.

5.2 The Environment Agency believes Government should clarify the diVering roles and responsibilitiesplayed by regions and local authorities in delivering climate change adaptation. However, in doing so,Government must also ensure an equal imperative for both to ensure a co-ordinated response.

5.3 In our view, regions should have the strategic overview for climate change. Regional SpatialStrategies or their successors have a key function in addressing climate change and must deliver againstclimate change mitigation and in particular adaptation objectives. Regional Development Agencies mustalso be given clear climate change duties. This would build on existing work, ensuring existing commitmentscontained in Regional Climate Change Action Plans are integrated into statutory documents, as well asbuilding on existing structures, such as the established Regional Climate Change Partnerships. It wouldmake the best use of the forthcoming UKCIP08 scenarios, which go down to regional level, as well as beingconsistent with the Governments plans to publish a UK Risk Report (as part of the Climate Change Bill),which will also go down to regional level. By identifying the major risks to businesses, infrastructure andassets, regions will be well placed to ensure a co-ordinated response across local authorities, business sectors,and other regional stakeholders.

5.4 Local authorities also have a key role in strategy development for their areas and in the delivery ofmeasures to ensure our communities, infrastructure and services are well-adapted. They need to worktogether on climate change issues particularly where adaptation requires a joint approach, for example,coastal authorities in relation to sea level rise or authorities in a river-basin catchment. Spatial planning willhave a major role to play, and it is essential that key documents, such as Local Development Frameworks,Local Area Agreements and Sustainable Community Strategies include clear climate change adaptationobjectives and policies based on comprehensive local risk-based assessments of vulnerabilities. In addition,local authorities will also be on the “frontline” of managing the response to climatic events and must beprepared to act. Parallels already exist here with the role they play in emergency planning and respondingto major incidents and climate change adaptation will require a similar approach, integrating adaptationplanning across all local authority service delivery areas.

Capacity Building

5.5 There are a number of opportunities for capacity building in the regions and with local authoritieswhich Government should consider in providing support for climate change adaptation. They are:

— The forthcoming UKCIP08 Scenarios will be an essential tool in helping regions and localauthorities understand the impacts of climate change. These scenarios diVer significantly from theolder UKCIP02 scenarios, reflecting the recent developments in climate science and taking a


“probablistic” approach. If regions and local authorities are to fully make use of these tools wewould recommend that Government increases the capacity of UKCIP in providing guidance andtraining to users at a regional and local authority level.

— Government should consider strengthening the long term arrangements for the Regional ClimateChange Partnerships, which have proved an eVective use of regional resources in the promotion,co-ordination and development of climate change tools, policy and advice. Their role in workingwith Regional Development Agencies under future regional governance arrangements will be key.

— Government should consider ways of supporting the Nottingham Declaration Partnership andstrengthening the eVective development of Nottingham Declaration Action Plans by localauthorities. We believe that the Nottingham Declaration has a vital role to play and its popularitywith local authorities is testament to it success. While the Nottingham Declaration Partnership(Environment Agency, Energy Savings Trust, Carbon Trust, UKCIP, IDeA and the LGA) hasachieved much on few resources, continued momentum will require a step change in the level andquality of advice given to local authorities. For example, the Partnership is currently investigatingthe feasibility of an accreditation scheme which would “quality assure” the Action Plans developedby local authorities, as well as updating and revising the current advice provided through itswebsite. To do this will require substantially higher levels of support from the Partnership andcentral Government.

January 2008

Memorandum submitted by The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT)

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) is the leading trade association for the UKautomotive industry, providing expert advice and information to its members as well as to externalorganisations. It represents more than 500 member companies ranging from vehicle manufacturers,component and material suppliers to power train providers and design engineers. The motor industry is acrucial sector of the UK economy, generating a manufacturing turnover of £47 billion, contributing wellover 10% of the UK’s total exports and supporting around 850,000 jobs.

We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this inquiry. We have responded to the pre-legislativeprocess for the Climate Change Bill and the Local Transport Bill. Both bills cover governance issues andare therefore pertinent to this inquiry.

Climate Change Policies and Transport

Climate change is an international issue, and the UK is taking a lead on the environmental agenda.Addressing climate change at a local level is possible, as local authorities have a plethora of policy optionsavailable to them. It is widely understood that local solutions and hence local policies are best for localissues. However, the issue of climate change is being addressed at all levels of government, and there mustbe consistency to avoid confusion and conflicting messages.

The role of central government in leading and supporting on climate change issues is multi- faceted.Central government should lead by example, and also provide clear guidance and coherence for local,regional and devolved government. It is essential that for any local or regional climate change policy theremust be a central reference point. This is of particular concern for SMMT in relation to transport policies.DiVerences exist between levels of government and regions in criteria and principles for transport policieswith climate change aspects, such as CO2-related varied parking charges (London Borough of Richmond)and the proposed Emissions Related Congestion Charge (ERCC) for London. SMMT is concerned withthe inconsistency between these levels and also duplication. There is a lack of clarity and coherence inpolicies which means confusion for consumers and vehicle manufacturers amongst others.

For car manufacturing in the UK, CO2 regulations are set at an EU level for products, nationally VehicleExcise Duty is set through CO2 banding, as are levels of fuel taxation. Additionally, at a local level in theUK there are diVerences in charges for driving and parking your vehicles based on CO2 bandings. There aremulti-level pressures, with diVering criteria, meaning our members are subject to increased pressures on CO2

breakpoints. There needs to be good communication and understanding across all levels of government toensure the full context of policies is understood. Our members seek international harmonisation for climatechange policies to ensure they are eYcient, eVective and fair. Cars and other automotive products are builtto comply with the majority of regulations.

Government is pursuing UK emissions targets through the Climate Change Bill. Targets and regulationare one way in which central government can encourage action on climate change. However, it should beunderstood that targets must be realistic and achievable and that “climate change related areas like wasteand transport” cover a diverse range of issues each of which have diVerent economic, social andenvironmental impacts, therefore caution should be exercised when implementing and comparing theeVectiveness of climate change policies. EVorts to reduce carbon from transport in particular, unlike forexample refuse collection, has a wider impact than a local area.


Central Government Supporting Local Government

There currently appears to be a lack of joined-up thinking in the roles of diVerent levels of government,government departments and regulators, in tackling the issue of climate change. In particular, there is aserious lack of strong national guidance. This may be due to the “newness” of the issue and also recognitionof the urgency and public awareness. However, joined up policy/regulation making is not a new issue andthis should be addressed. Recent examples to help local and regional governments have included the settingup of the Local Better Regulation OYce to account for better communication and working methodsbetween regulators, local authorities and central government. Mixed messages from diVerent levels ofgovernment can cause confusion and lessen the impact of climate change policies. London Boroughs are anexample of diVerent “green” policies in a region. Ultimately, all levels of government should base policieson a sound impact assessment with consistent criteria. The proposals for an ERCC in London and thetimings for discounts and increased charges (pre- and post- mayoral elections respectively) show how localpolitics should not impact on good policy making. From the viewpoint of the automotive industry, joinedup regulatory initiatives and the passage of regulation from international, EU, UK and local levels, has notalways worked well. For example, manufacturing sites are subject to an increasing amount of burdensomereporting regulations and requirements, the result is that similar information is transmitted to variousgovernment agencies and departments. From the EU level, manufacturing sites comply with the IPPCdirective and many are included in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. At UK level, they then comply withthe CCA/CCLs and now the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) has been introduced. Some permitsrelating to the trading schemes are administered at local level, as well as nationally and internationally. Allof the above have reporting requirements, yet data cannot be shared causing undue administrative burdenson our members—better regulation principles at all levels of government must include an assessment whatother policies are in place.

Governance and Powers

The governance barriers to local and regional action are being addressed through current parliamentaryBills, and the eVectiveness of them can only be judged in practice following their assent. Local policies workwell when properly co-ordinated and are subject to full stakeholder consultation. There is concern that somelocal authorities may adopt specific climate change policies to ensure they receive associated fundingstreams, such as has been suggested in relation to road pricing. The Transport Act 2000 ensured localauthorities had the powers to implement local road pricing schemes, but not until the recent introductionof funding for road pricing schemes (through the Transport Innovation Fund) has there been widespreadconsideration of implementing local schemes.

Targets for Different Levels of Government

As mentioned, SMMT welcomes the Climate Change Bill but is concerned it is unilateral and climatechange policies are most eVectively addressed on a global stage. There is concern that disaggregated targetscan lead to distinct diVerences in policies between localities. Carbon reduction policies need to be based onsound economic, environmental and social assessments. Policies need to be implemented and managedstrategically so that they achieve the objective of carbon reduction.

Committee on Climate Change

It is already notable how important the role of the Committee on Climate Change will be following recentamendments proposed in the House of Lords for the Climate Change Bill. The level of importance of theCommittee is also recognised by industry. Its strengths will be its representative and responsible nature. TheCommittee should consist of experts working with sound scientific and economic evidence, be independent,and avoid being politicised whilst representing all levels of Government. The reporting requirements of theCommittee should also ensure it is responsive to needs. SMMT would support full stakeholder engagementwith the Committee, in terms of business and government, where for example organisations such as theNational Local Government Network and the CBI would prove useful.

Good Practice Ideas and the Role of “Other” Institutions

As aforementioned, SMMT supports government leading by example; it also supports the sharing of best-practice and worst-practice. Central government should have responsibility for co-ordinating networks forinformation sharing. A good example of government and industry working together is the Act on CO2

website (www.dft.gov.uk/ActOnCO2). Here consumer is given clear messages ahead of purchasing avehicles on the lowest-CO2 emitting vehicle for their needs. Consumers can see this in terms of VED band,which is also reflected by the new car labels in car showrooms. There is consistency and clarity in thisapproach.


Good practice should also include a robust review policy at all levels of government to ensure that policieswhich are not meeting their objectives are changed. The organisations mentioned in question 10 of theinquiry are not an exhaustive list. In our experience support from the Energy Savings Trust has beeninconsistent and caused serious disruption to the market and uncertainty for consumers and manufacturers.The EST administered PowerShift grants which gave incentives for the purchase of low-carbon vehicles. Thegrant was removed by the EST in 2004 and the market was distorted and ensured demand for gas poweredcars collapsed. The role of such organisations needs to be subject to guidance to ensure consistency in climatechange and other policies.

Should you have queries on any of the points in this response, please do not hesitate to contact me.

14 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Renewable Energy Association

The Renewable Energy Association was established in 2001 to represent British renewable energyproducers and promote the use of sustainable energy in the UK. Currently we have 500! membersrepresenting installers and manufacturers of renewable energy technology and bodies with an interest in thisgrowing sector. We are the largest body in the UK that represents the Renewable Energy Industry.

REA’s main objective is to secure the best legislative and regulatory framework for expanding renewableenergy production in the UK. We undertake policy development and provide input to governmentdepartments, agencies, regulators, NGOs and others.

We have a number of Resource Groups, some looking at individual technologies, others focused onindustry sub-sectors.

Recommendation 1

That central government advises all local authorities to set renewable energy targets for both their own estateand for their householders

Rationale

Under the new Local Government Performance Framework Local Authorities have to report onreductions in carbon emissions for both their own activities and per capita for the population for the areathey cover. The contribution to achieving this figure can be broken down by how those emissions were savedeg energy conservation renewables etc. Given that achieving the necessary carbon reduction targetsnecessary to avert damaging climate change will require more generation of heat and power from renewablesources it makes sense for local authorities to both encourage the take up of renewables in their own districtand in improvements to their own property portfolio. Another important reason to set targets for localauthorities is so their contribution to assisting the UK’s proportion of the EU 20% renewables target by2020 can be assessed.

Recommendation 2

That government directs all local authorities to consider renewable energy options in the refurbishment andconstruction of public buildings using whole life costing principles

Rationale

The new “Use of Resources key lines of enquiry” document makes the statement in KLOE 5.2—that thereshould be:

“More emphasis on stronger, longer term, full cost evaluation, including (at levels 3 and 4)consideration of environmental and social in its assessment of costs and benefits of decisionmaking”.

In his statement would back up investment decision like those made at Barnsley Council where initiallyhigh capital costs for Biomass boilers were oVset within the lifetime of the equipment by the much lowerfuel costs. Too often councils will make decisions to retrofit a new boiler or specify fossil fuel using boilerswithout even considering the renewable energy alternatives.

Recommendation 3


That all local authorities are encouraged by central government to set up a scheme to support the installationof renewable technology for householders, such as Kirklees Councils RE-Charge scheme

Rationale

The Kirklees Council RE-charge scheme is one where the council underwrites the installation of up to£10,000 worth of renewable energy technology in a household which it then recovers when the property issold through a “second charge”. A second charge is an alternative name for a secured loan, so called becausethe loan is guaranteed or “charged” on your home, and is the Second Charge on your home—your Mortgagebeing the first. The holder of a second charge has a legal call on the property in the event of the borrowerdefaulting on repayments, but only after all liabilities to the holder of the first charge are settled. Once themoney is recovered it goes back into the loan fund to be used to pay for more installations. The principleadvantage of the scheme is that the householder has no upfront costs but gets the benefit of renewabletechnology immediately.

Recommendation 4

That government calls on all local planning authorities adopt a ‘Merton style’ renewable energy target for newdevelopments

Rationale

The recently published Planning Policy Statement on Climate Change confirmed that Local PlanningAuthorities will be able to specify targets for on-site renewables in all major new developments. Such policiesas these will help Councils achieve their carbon reduction and renewables targets. It will enable localdevelopers, builders and architects to become familiar with the technology in preparation for theintroduction of zero carbon homes in 2016. Enabling the renewables sector to grow in a local area throughthese policies will help produce a healthy market for the technology and reduce costs.

24 January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the OYce of the City Remebrancer, City of London Corporation

Introduction

1. The City of London Corporation has long been aware that a clean environment, quality of life andeconomic prosperity go hand in hand, from planning and health in the 12th Century to the Clean Air PrivateBill in the 1950s. It has therefore been paying close attention to developments in the science, theories andpractice surrounding the issue of climate change as a whole. The City has been working to reduce itsemissions for sometime now and, through investment in new energy saving equipment, the purchase ofelectricity from renewable sources, and the utilisation of heat and chilled water supplies, a reduction incarbon emissions of 38% below 1990 levels was recorded in 2005–06.

2. The City Corporation recognises however that even if carbon emissions were cut to zero overnight, theeVects of climate change are likely to continue to impact upon the population for many years to come. It isimperative therefore that the City of London ensures that it will be able to continue to deliver the servicesand maintain an infrastructure that underpins the success of the business City. The following paragraphsset out some of the initiatives the City Corporation has undertaken in this area.

Internal Practices

3. The City Corporation’s Energy Working Party (EWP) was established in 1975 and comprises seniorMembers of the Court of Common Council. Its main objective is to review the City Corporation’s energyperformance, its carbon emissions and to make recommendations with respect to capital expenditure andpolicy development. In 1998 the EWP recommended the purchase of renewable energy across the City ofLondon Corporation. Consequently, the Guildhall, all public and street lighting, Mansion House, theBarbican Centre, The Old Bailey, New Spitalfields Market, Billingsgate Market and the City of LondonSchool are now all run on renewable energy contracts, saving in excess of 15,000 tonnes of carbon per year.

4. StaV are encouraged to take responsibility for their energy usage in a number of ways. In addition toinformation, supplied through media such as screen savers, staV bulletins and articles in the staV magazine,regular energy audits are conducted by the energy team and a network of volunteer energy wardens has beenestablished across the organisation. These individuals take responsibility for on-site monitoring of energyconsumption as well as engaging with staV about the benefits of energy saving. Alongside this, the crossdepartmental Sustainability OYcers Working Group, assists in the identification of opportunities toenhance energy eYciency and cut carbon emissions. The group was, for example, actively involved in thedevelopment of internal recycling facilities.


The City Community

Residents

5. Increasing temperature fluctuations expected as a result of climate change are anticipated to have anegative impact on air quality within the City. The City has joined a partnership of organisations led by theEuropean Space Agency in order to provide a free air quality alerts service. This allows anyone working orliving in the City to sign up to receive free pollution alerts when air pollution may be elevated. The“airTEXT” service also oVers health advice so that individuals can take steps to reduce the likelihood ofany impacts. Participants in the scheme can choose to receive the alert by text message, voicemail messageor an email, either on the evening before or on the morning of days when elevated air pollution levels arepredicted.

6. The City’s climate change adaptation strategy recommended the identification of flooding “hotspots”within the City, in particular identifying where localised flooding is likely during extreme weather events.Due to the topography of the City one of the areas most at risk is towards the east of the City and this iswhere the analysis is being focused as part of the City’s strategic flood risk assessment. The adaptationstrategy also recommended the development of a heat health warning system (HHW), the provision ofportable air conditioning units, and the establishment of air conditioned refuges in public buildings duringheat waves. In partnership with the local NHS trust, the City is taking forward the HHW and aims toidentify individuals who are at particular risk during heat waves.

7. As part of the corporate performance management system, a sustainability planning tool across isbeing introduced across the City of London Corporation. To date the Department of Children’s andCommunity Services (DCCS), Open Spaces Department, Environmental Services Department andDepartment of Planning & Transportation have undertaken training and incorporated sustainability intotheir business planning and performance management culture. This has allowed these departments toidentify joined up ways of delivering new services. For example, carers from DCCS now provide advice onenergy eYciency and climate change impacts to their clients.

8. The City Corporation’s Housing Service is committed to eradicating fuel poverty for those living inhousing of which the City is landlord and a number of improvements have been made to housing stock.These include a series of insulation programmes across estates, the installation of more eYcient condenserboilers. Energy wardens are also employed on estates to monitor energy use and opportunities for installingsolar panels to supplement domestic hot water use are also being investigated.

Businesses

9. Awareness is particularly high in the business community in the City. This awareness goes beyondfirms’ recognition of the business opportunities associated with climate change. Evidence of this can befound in the high degree of awareness and interest amongst members of the City Environmental Forum,which was established by the City of London Corporation in 2005. The Forum comprised of CorporateSocial Responsibility and Communications managers from City of London businesses is free of charge,meets quarterly and is open to any business based within the Square Mile.

10. The City is the global centre of carbon emissions trading, and many firms within the City arebeginning to enter this new market. The degree of interest is not only evident in the willingness with whichbusinesses joined the London Accord (see paragraph 13: International below), but also in the fact that thesoon to be launched City Climate Pledge has already attracted a large number of businesses willing to signup before the programme has been launched. The “lights-oV London” campaign was also extremely wellreceived in the City, with many firms taking part.

Planning

11. The City’s planning oYcers assist developers wanting to maximise the energy eYciency of newbuildings through the planning process. When submitting applications for new developments, developersare asked to demonstrate that energy eYciency has been optimised, and that renewable energy has beenproperly considered by producing an “energy statement”. Developers are also strongly encouraged toachieve a minimum BREEAM55 rating of “Very Good” and in order to assist in this, a range of researchand guidance notes have been produced, including “Green Roofs—a Guidance note for developers” whichwas produced in collaboration with the British Council for OYces. The City’s new Local DevelopmentFramework has also incorporated climate change adaptation within its policies and the guidance that isbeing produced for developers. City planning oYcers have also undertaken a Strategic Flood RiskAssessment. This study is intended to inform the City’s Planning process in ensuring that futuredevelopment takes account of the risk of flooding particularly in the face of climate change.

55 Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method.


Working in Partnership

12. The City of London Corporation has been involved in establishing and leading on partnershipsseeking to assist in the fight against climate change. One recent example of these is the City Climate Pledge,a new initiative established in response to a request from the business community to develop a programmeenabling them to demonstrate their commitment to tackling climate change. The pledge, being developedin partnership with The Carbon Trust and Pure-The Clean Planet Trust, takes a similar approach tomanaging carbon as the three “R”s used for waste management and recycling (reduce-reuse-recycle). Underthis pledge, the three “M”s approach asks firms to Measure and report on their carbon footprint, Mitigatetheir footprint by introducing energy eYciency measure (assisted with advice from the Carbon Trust) andMandate the oVsetting of unavoidable emissions through reputable and auditable carbon oVsetting schemes(assisted by Pure).

13. Other partnership work can be split broadly into three categories:

Londonwide

— In 2001, the City Corporation became the first local administrative body to join the LondonClimate Change Partnership (LCCP) which, with the assistance of City Corporation funding,published “London’s Warming”, the first ever analysis of the impacts of climate change on a majorurban area. The City continues to play a role on the steering committee and is also an activemember of several of its sub-groups, including the Financial Services Sub-Group, the PropertySub-Group and the Three Regions Climate Change Group. This last group was responsible forpublishing “Adapting to climate change: a checklist for development”.

— In 2002, in partnership with Forum for the Future the City Corporation established the LondonSustainability Exchange (LSx). LSx is actively involved in motivating behaviour change on issuessuch as global warming in diverse communities across London.

— In 2005 the City of London Corporation became a founding member of the London ClimateChange Agency. The LCCA was established to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions fromLondon. It is a commercial company wholly owned, controlled by and housed in the LondonDevelopment Agency.

— The City of London’s City Bridge Trust, London’s largest charitable grant making body, recentlyestablished a new initiative aimed at “greening” the third sector. It entered into partnership with12 voluntary sector organisations across London to provide them with free eco-audits, aimed atimproving their environmental performance, and carbon footprints. The results of this study wererecently published in the form of a guide, and have generated a great deal of positive feedback fromvoluntary organisations from across London and beyond.

— The City has sought to engage local authorities in events such as the Clean Automotive Transport(CAT) seminar and research programmes such as the London Sustainable Construction Initiativeand Green Roofs Advice Note. The latter has proved extremely influential and has been adoptedas planning guidance by the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham.

National

— In 2005, in partnership with UK Trade and Investment, the City Corporation founded LondonClimate Change Services, the industry body which represents the interests of climate changeprofessionals. In addition to giving the industry a coherent voice when engaging with theGovernment, LCCS also assists in the promotion of UK expertise in international markets.

— In 2006 the City joined the All Party Parliamentary Group on Climate Change, and hascontributed information and speakers to meetings of this group.

— The City is also an active member of the Construction Industries Council SustainabilityCommittee, the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, the London EnvironmentalCoordinators Forum and Forum for the Future’s Local Authority Partnership.

International

— In 2002 in partnership with Forum for the Future and Defra, the City established the LondonPrinciples Project, a research project focusing on sustainable finance. Following extensiveconsultation with stakeholders, this project became part of the UK Government submission to theJohannesburg Earth Summit, where the City of London signed a memorandum of understandingwith the United Nations Environment Project to promote finance and insurance for sustainabledevelopment. The project is on-going, and in partnership with the DTI and Gresham College theCity recently published “Clean Finance”, a report examining how eco-innovation and low carbontechnology was funded in the UK.


— In 2006, the City of London, along with BP, Forum for the Future, Gresham College and Z/YenConsulting, launched The London Accord, a unique collaborative research project intended toshare thinking on climate change mitigation and to provide analysis of approaches to directinvestment to the best opportunities for investment. A number of leading City organisations havesupplied their research teams without charge with the aim of providing a shared consensus topresent greater clarity and better measurement of the link between investment, financial and“carbon” returns and also a better understanding of the role of public policy in this area. Thereport was published in December and is intended to be a reference guide for investors as theyconsider climate change, and incorporates both the wider agenda (energy security andenvironmental sustainability) as well as specific investment research.

Sustainable City Awards

14. The Sustainable City Awards were established in 2001 by the City of London Corporation with theaim of recognising and rewarding best practice in sustainable business in the UK across eight categories.The awards are delivered in partnership with 17 business and voluntary sector organisations. Since theirinception, the awards have become the leading sustainable development awards scheme in the UK and actto raise the profile of winning organisations, encouraging participants to show improvement year on year.Last year the Climate Change Category attracted entries from 27 organisations including the public sectorand household names such as BSkyB.

15. The Awards have also attracted entries from local authorities, such as the London Borough ofBromley, who in 2007 were runners-up in the traYc and transport category, and the London Borough ofEnfield who were overall winners of the competition in 2005 for their work on sustainable construction. TheCity also runs initiatives such as the Clean City Awards Scheme which seeks to enhance the ability ofbusinesses within the Square Mile to manage waste eVectively. Both award schemes provide participantswith the opportunity to network and share best practice, further supporting their eVorts.

Adaptation

16. The City’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy “Rising to the Challenge”, published last year,examines how the City’s services and infrastructure will need to adapt in order to predict impacts of climatechange compiled to assist the City in preparing for the likely impacts of climate change. The Strategy wascommissioned by the City of London and drawn together by leading consultants, Acclimatise, inconsultation with a wide range of partners. Workshops were held with oYcers from across the City ofLondon Corporation, as well as City stakeholders, including Thames Water, the Environment Agency, theAssociation of British Insurers (ABI), Transport for London, the Government OYce for London andLondon Metropolitan University. In addition, City businesses including RBS, KPMG, Charles RussellAssociates and CliVord Chance attended as well as the neighbouring boroughs of Tower Hamlets,Westminster, Hackney and Islington. The Greater London Authority were also represented. A largeworkshop was held in July 2006 to identify the major climate risks, this was followed by a number of smallermeetings in August, to identify and appraise adaptation actions to address those risks.

17. The resulting document is intended to be a comprehensive and highly accessible piece of work whichclearly outlines the major risks from climate change to the City along with recommendations on remedialaction. The strategy aims to “climate-proof” the City of London, by undertaking a number of actions:initiating research and monitoring to help develop appropriate policy and actions on climate adaptation;climate proofing policies, practices, assets and infrastructure; working in partnership with utilities andservice providers, other public sector bodies, residents and businesses in achieving this. The main climaterisks the City faces are raised under the following headings; flood risks, water resources, heat risks andpollution and ground conditions. Each section outlines the highest priority risks and correspondingadaptation measures to manage the risks, cross cutting issues and opportunities are also described. Theappendices outline specific climate risks, showing which City Corporation departments are most likely tobe impacted by that risk and giving an indication of the severity and likelihood of the threat. A key featureof the strategy is the checklist for “climate-proofing” the City of London Corporation policies and projects.

18. Many local authorities now have climate change strategies but these tend to focus on mitigationrather than adaptation. The City’s Adaptation Strategy is the first of its type to be produced by a UK localgovernment body and, it is hoped, will be of use to those authorities who have not yet identified adaptationas an issue that needs to be addressed now. Though it is specific to the City of London, the issues raisedwithin the City’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy are common to most boroughs and the “ClimateProofing” checklist is transferable across the board. EVorts are therefore being made to share the documentwith as many people as possible. It is being sent out to all Chief Executives of local authorities in Englandand Wales and presentations have been given to, or are planned for, a number of special interest groups. Inaddition the then Lord Mayor discussed the strategy with Russian counterparts during his visit to the cityof Moscow last year and copies were taken by Defra to the Intergovernmental Climate Change Conferenceat The Hague.


19. The City Corporation has also convened an internal working party which is currently drawing up aseries of action plans, projects and programmes to address the points of action contained within the strategy.Initial investigations indicate that much is already being addressed as a matter of good management practicebut the strategy has also made a massive contribution to the City’s Local Development Framework andexpedited the delivery of our flood risk assessment. The issues and actions identified within the strategy haveprompted the City to work more closely with service delivery organisations, such as those in the voluntarysector that we might not have previously approached on this issue. In depth conversations have also beeninitiated with bodies such as Ofwat and ofgem to examine the resilience of energy and water supplies to theSquare Mile and adaptation is on the agenda for the City Environmental Forum, a forum facilitated by theCorporation for facilities and environmental managers throughout the Business City.

Procurement

20. In addition to the purchase of renewable energy highlighted at paragraph 3 above, climate changehas been integrated into the City’s corporate purchasing policy in a number of ways not least in mandatingthe use of environmentally beneficial products, services and technologies. In addition, a Local PurchasingDirective is in place to maximise contract opportunities for suppliers based in Camden, Islington, Hackney,Tower Hamlets, Newham, Southwark, Lambeth & City of London.

21. The Lord Mayor’s oYcial travel has been oVset for the last six years and for the last four years theCity has voluntarily oVset the CO2 produced by the Lord Mayor’s Show, using a combination of forestryand energy eYcient projects in the UK and developing nations. Since 2004, the City Corporation has madeconsiderable use of expertise in this emerging sector, including The CarbonNeutral Company, anorganisation based in the charitable sector, and CO2e.com, a subsidiary of global financial services firmCantor Fitzgerald which operates in the European Emissions Trading Market. With the help of othercommercial organisations, the City of London Corporation has additionally oVset the oYcial travel of staVand Members since November 2001, by the purchase of low energy light bulbs for use by communities inMauritius. OVsets have saved 221 tonnes of CO2 emissions associated with essential City vehicle use sinceNovember 2001. Further, through the CarbonNeutral Company, the City Corporation has invested in avariety of forestry and development projects. In 2006 the City purchased its carbon oVsets throughCO2e.com and invested in a project which manufactures high eYciency wood burning stoves for use bySouth African communities. Through such measures, carbon oVsetting has been demonstrated as having apositive environmental impact and an ability to bring wider social and economic benefits.

January 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Association for the Conservation of Energy

Introduction

The Association for the Conservation of Energy is a lobbying, campaigning and policy researchorganisation, and has worked in the field of energy eYciency since 1981. Our lobbying and campaigningwork represents the interests of our membership: major manufacturers and distributors of energy savingequipment in the United Kingdom. Our policy research is funded independently, and is focused on four keythemes: policies and programmes to encourage increased energy eYciency; the environmental benefits ofincreased energy eYciency; the social impacts of energy use and of investment in energy eYciency measures;and organisational roles in the process of implementing energy eYciency policy.

ACE believes that local, regional and devolved governments have a crucial role in tackling climate changebut barriers to change need to be dismantled and incentives increased to help these bodies bring about thefundamental shift needed to move to low carbon communities.

ACE contributed to the first two key stakeholders’ workshops on the Performance Indicators on ClimateChange organised by Defra.

During the campaign to improve the DCLG “Planning Policy Statement: Planning and Climate Change”ACE set up an informal campaign and information network for local authorities active on renewable energyand energy eYciency issues. Such a non-party group could impress upon government the changes neededto national policy: indeed a minister told ACE very recently that such a network would be welcomed by herto help inform policy making.


Summary

The government must provide a stable policy and financial regime for local authorities to act eVectivelyand over time.

The government should support the Planning and Energy Bill, promoted by Michael Fallon MP, whichgives local councils the ability in law to set higher green standards in new local buildings than are currentlyrequired under Building Regulations. This should reassure councils that they would not be subject torepeated government U-turns on this issue.

The new performance regime for local authorities in England contains performance indicators designedto influence councils to cut carbon emissions in the council’s own buildings, in the community, and toimprove the energy eYciency of households living in fuel poverty. The practical things the government coulddo regarding local authorities to make these carbon and fuel poverty indicators work:

Own Estate

There needs to be a rise in consultancy advice support from the Carbon Trust from the present 20 councilsa year, or a pot of money to employ private sector consultants. In addition there must be far greaterguaranteed financial support for local councils from the Salix Fund.

In the Community

To implement the PPS Climate Change, the government must provide additional funding for planningdepartments to employ skilled staV or consultants with knowledge of sustainable energy systems—to enablecouncils to develop viable plans and negotiate with private developers on cutting emissions in newdevelopment.

The government to force an agreement on EST on the amount of advice and support it gives localauthorities with regard to improving energy eYciency in homes—EST cut this when they lost the VAT issue.

The government should hold the ring on some kind of formalised agreement or standard contract betweenthe energy suppliers and the local authorities with regard to CERT action in localities—this is particularlyimportant with regards to reaching the Priority Group.

Government to implement as soon as possible Article 7 of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive,which requires all public buildings over 1000 square metres to display an energy performance certificate.This must, in the correct interpretation of the Directive, be extended to all buildings used by the public (ienot just public sector buildings).

Councils will need to be empowered by the government to collect Energy Performance Certificate data onindividual dwellings to build up hard information on a property by property basis which will be useful fortargeting. At present they can collect this data purely for “trading standards” purposes.

The government should abandon its attempt to repeal the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 andinstead use its provisions to bolster the new performance indicators.


The question the Committee could ask the government is how far are you willing to go to work with localauthorities to achieve significant carbon savings? Are you willing to provide a stable policy and financialregime for local authorities to act eVectively and over time?

Unfortunately, the government has “form” on playing fast and loose with local government onsustainable energy matters, and this lack of consistency smacks of a general contempt by UK governmentfor local government. For example, in the Budget 2006, local authorities were promised £20 million over theensuing two years to promote energy eYciency in local housing. This amount was considerably reduced ina one-oV grant programme where projects had to be set up and spend their grant money all within a year!

One of the examples of central government flip-flopping is the “Merton Rule”, which the ODPMoriginally opposed, then supported, then copied into the Planning Policy 22 to encourage other localplanning authorities to follow suit. However, during the drafting of the Planning Policy Statement onClimate Change, the first draft supported the Merton Rule, the second essentially hamstrung it, while thethird and final version produced something like the Rule. This is no way to encourage councils to takeaction. The government could support the Planning and Energy Bill, promoted by Michael Fallon MP,which gives local councils the ability in law to set higher green standards in new local buildings than arecurrently required under Building Regulations. This should reassure councils that they would not be subjectto repeated government u-turns on this issue.


Another example is the government support for the Home Energy Conservation Act 199556 and relatedlegislation, supported by ACE and passed with all-party agreement. Defra has allowed HECA, the onlylegislation-backed policy on climate change mitigation that concerns local government to “wither on thevine”. This is despite EST showing it to be by far the most eVective energy saving programme pre-EEC.57

Defra seem to have little interest in enforcing HECA: they have not eVectively pursued those who do notsubmit reports in time,58 nor published any figures until well over a year late, and seem unbothered aboutthe accuracy59 of returns.60 It is ironic in the fact that if HECA were started now, it would logically beginprecisely with asking each council to set out a policy on how to reduce domestic energy consumption acrossa 10 or 15 year period.61

There is also the sorry list of government agencies such as the Energy Saving Trust (EST), setting up andabandoning successful local government programmes and pilots for budgetary reasons.

With the growing importance of sustainable development issues the policy emphasis must genuinely beon the leading role that local communities have in managing their environment. The government mustempower local communities—through their elected representatives—to make the decisions that are right fortheir new developments and give local people a sense of shared responsibility for eco-friendly developmentsin their communities.

So, first, central government needs to provide a higher degree of continuity to its attitude and policy withregard to local government. In November 2002 the LGA published a research briefing called ClimateChange: a survey of local authorities.62 The authors of the report wrote:

“For central government, the survey results reinforce the need for national leadership, and a cleardemonstration that climate change is indeed a national priority. This needs to be communicatedclearly to local authorities by valuing and rewarding [precisely the opportunity sorely missed underHECA to date] those who take action in this area, even if the benefits are long term and not astangible as cleaner streets or improved exam results”.

Since then the government has published its new Performance Indicators for local authorities in England.Councils, if they take action on these climate change indicators (and there is no requirement to do so, unlessin a Local Area Agreement), need to decide what to prioritise if their objective is to maximise the amountof carbon saved. Lacking much knowledge of energy usage in buildings, most will need help with this processand extra resources from external sources as support.

Councils need to be advised as to what action they can take. There is a lack of audited or even reportedenergy savings in case studies collected by Practical Help and other agencies. This needs to be improved andDefra, as the main funder of the Energy Saving trust (EST), should require this information to be produced.

Specific government support in terms of reformed government policy is required to create more energyservice companies (ESCOs) and decentralised energy systems: a government report is expected. Hopefully,the practical reasons why district or distributed energy thrives in other countries such as Denmark—but notin the UK—will feed through into changes in legislation and regulation.

Councils will need to be empowered by the government to collect Energy Performance Certificate data onindividual dwellings to build up hard information on an estate by estate (and eventually property byproperty basis) which will be useful for targeting. At present they can collect this data purely for “tradingstandards” purposes.

There will be indicators on carbon emission savings to be included in the new council performance regimein England from April 2008. If these were backed by adequate extra resources it would show that centralgovernment was serious in its ambitions for action by local authorities on cutting emissions of carbon. Theissue then will be—will the councils have enough resources to make a diVerence?

An incentive for central government could be the targets below which the government has committeditself to and could be made easier to achieve if the government was committed to working seriously withlocal authorities:

(a) By 2020 the general level of energy eYciency of residential accommodation has been increased byat least 20% compared with the general level of such energy eYciency in 2010.

56 HECA requires all UK local authorities with housing responsibilities to prepare an energy conservation report identifyingmeasures to significantly improve the energy eYciency of all residential accommodation in their area and to report on progressin implementing the measures.

57 There are several good examples of HECA projects which are discussed in the annex of this document.58 Southend and Isles of Scilly have apparently never submitted a report.59 Defra has been frequently criticised by councils for not enforcing a common methodology.60 ACE estimate that around 1 in 4 councils really are delivering on their commitments under HECA.61 The latest HECA data as reported by Energy Conservation Authorities in England in the period 1 April 1996 to 31 March

2005 has now been published. Authorities have reported an overall improvement in domestic energy eYciency ofapproximately 16.7% as measured against a 1996 baseline. Information: Defra website http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/energy/heca95/index.htm

62 Around half of the 400 councils responded. The results were generally depressing, with the only area of significant progresswas that over half of the councils had adopted “green” tariVs for electricity.


(b) By the end of 2010 the general level of energy usage in the commercial and public services sectorshas reduced by at least 10% compared with the general level of such energy usage in 2005 and bythe end of 2020 by at least 10% compared with the general level of such energy usage in 2010.

(c) 10% of electricity shall be generated from renewable sources by 2010 and 20% by 2020.

(d) 10 Giga-Watt of good quality combined heat and power shall be generated by 2010.

References will be made to these targets that could potentially be included in the pending Climate ChangeBill, throughout the document.

Energy suppliers should work more closely with councils and their agents to provide EEC/CERTresources to householders willing to improve their properties. The government may need to hold the ringon some kind of formalised agreement or standard contract between the energy suppliers and the localauthorities with regard to EEC/CERT investment—particularly the Priority Group. Unfortunately, theanarchy of the short-term arrangements of the moment has not proved durable and it is in the interests ofall parties to get things sorted for CERT and beyond.


There are few examples of current legislation driving council action on climate change mitigation.These include:

The 1995 Home Energy Conservation Act (HECA) provided new duties and responsibilities for all localauthorities with regard to energy conservation in all residential accommodation, making them energyconservation authorities that had to implement a home energy eYciency strategy. See the annexes forvarious examples of HECA action. Defra now want to repeal HECA.

In 2000, the government required local authorities to produce another linked strategy aimed at assistingthose private householders who had particular diYculty in maintaining adequate warmth in their homes inwinter due to a combination of low income, poor insulation, or ineYcient heating. In response, councilscreated a Fuel Poverty strategy to address this aspect of energy conservation. The key strategy elementscommonly identified included the need to “develop appropriate partnerships with other organisations tocontribute towards the achievement of aVordable warmth”, and to “target energy advice to the mostvulnerable members of the local community”.63 The government has admitted that it is likely to fail its 2010fuel poverty target. It needs to rethink the role for local government (beyond the performance indicator)and resources required to help reach the target. Defra has done nothing with respect to the local reports onfuel poverty which have been statutorily submitted with HECA returns since 2000—again an opportunityperpetually missed. The Association for the Conservation of Energy, funded by Eaga PartnershipCharitable Trust, published the only “Review of English Local Authority Fuel Poverty Reports andStrategies” in 2003,64 based on these reports. Defra should have carried this out itself, and used theinformation to good eVect, as for example ACE has done with the Local Authority Self Assessment tool,65

also published in 2003.

Local authorities liable for the government’s mandatory Carbon Reduction Commitment scheme (CRC)should have the money recirculated to them in the form of grants for specific projects, rather than a chequewithout strings.

It is essential that the diVerences in resources (especially with regard to housing) are recognised betweencouncils, the extremes being metropolitan unitary councils with concentrated levels of deprivation whichreceive the lion’s share of government housing money versus small rural district councils, with widelydispersed individual households in fuel poverty, which receive very little.

It is important that the government does not exaggerate the size of the resources available to localauthorities (LAs) from the energy suppliers for energy eYciency (EEC/CERT) and from Eaga Warm Front.For the sake of eYciency the energy suppliers prefer to deal with large councils or social landlords andusually only provide a very small part of the total finance in any social housing renovation scheme. WithEaga Warm Front, cooperation largely consists of exchanges of useful information.

63 From Southend on Sea Fuel Poverty Strategy.64 http://www.ukace.org/publications/ACE%20Research%20(2003-08)%20-%20Review%20of%20English%20Local%20

Authority%20Fuel%20Poverty%20Reports%20and%20Strategies%20200365 http://old.ukace.org/selfassess/index.html



ACE supports these indicators. The question is, will the government follow through with enoughresources, support and enforcement to make a success of these indicators?

HECA was widely adhered to early on, and taken very seriously by a significant number of councils.Financial support through the HECAction programme was provided, and then axed in favour of theInnovation Fund, and that was in turn axed when money became tight at Defra after the foot and mouthemergency.

So, while ACE agrees that inclusion of these indicators in the local government performance frameworkis essential if more authorities are to give carbon saving the commitment required, it acknowledges thatwithout continuing support from the centre many councils will simply drop them as too hard, andconcentrate on the other 195 indicators in subjects they are familiar with.

Nobody wants to add unnecessarily to the burdens of local government, however, one addition to makecouncils take the climate change indicators seriously—as a driver of significant value and consideration—should be for central government to make their inclusion mandatory in all Local Area Agreements. Thesame should also be considered for the Fuel Poverty Indicator.

Instead of trying to repeal HECA, it would also help if Defra actively reminded councils of their currentobligations under HECA and for tackling fuel poverty, warning them about the proposed PerformanceIndicators and showing them the advantages of taking action before these are introduced.

The rating and bold public display of energy certificates on public buildings and buildings regularlyaccessed by the public, when combined with engaging communication strategies and events, are an excellentmeans of raising awareness and demonstrate how residential energy users can make a diVerence. This isparticularly true in schools, where students can see improvements to their own building, make changes intheir own behaviour, and take these lessons home to influence energy used in the household. Following onfrom the success of the Display Campaign,66 we would urge the government to implement as soon aspossible Article 7 of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, which requires all public buildings over1000 square metres to display an energy performance certificate. Furthermore, as implied above, we wantto see a proper interpretation of the Directive to cover not just publicly owned buildings, but all buildingsvisited by the public, eg theatres, supermarkets, banks, sports facilities, etc.

Councils as a Social Housing Providers—Upgrade the Decent Homes Standard

More serious attention should be paid by the government to the thermal requirements set out in theDecent Homes Standard for Social Housing when they are next revised. This is necessary in order to ensurethat the government meets its legal duty to alleviate fuel poverty and will also mean further reductions incarbon emissions from the domestic sector. However, councils whose tenants vote to stay under councilcontrol should not be penalised in borrowing or rent terms as at present.

Social housing is at such a crisis point in terms of lack of availability that it needs a revival of councilhouse building—and hints that the government is considering substantially increasing investment in this arevery welcome. Under current policy, theses homes would be built to Code for Sustainable Homes 3 Starrating, which is a considerable improvement on current Building Regulations.


The barriers to the take-up of cost-eVective energy eYciency opportunities for LAs in their own estatesare the same as for other large organisations:

— the small proportion that energy costs take of total costs means that they are overlooked;

— energy costs are often spread over several budget headings or hidden in premises costs;

— the financial costs of implementing changes to procedures and energy sources;

66 The European DisplayTM Campaign (www.display-campaign.org), of which ACE is a coordinating partner, is a voluntaryscheme designed by energy experts from 20 European towns and cities. It is aimed at encouraging local authorities to publiclydisplay the energy and environmental performances of their public buildings using the same energy label that is used forhousehold appliances. At present, 303 local authorities from across Europe have publicly labelled 7,051 buildings.


— organisations tend to perceive environmental measures as separate to their main objectives; and

— the diYculties of engaging and mobilising employees into taking action.

In the 2002 LGA survey nearly four-fifths of councils said that insuYcient staV or staV time is the majorbarrier to them making progress on climate change issues, and nearly as many (71%) mentioned “otherpriorities taking higher priority in the council”, and the third most significant barrier cited by more thanhalf of all councils was “lack of funding”.

The best way of making councils take action is for government to require them to achieve specific targetson their performance indicator on carbon emissions (see response to Question 1). This should be followedby adequate resources to enable councils to tackle this new task (see answer to question 10).

Several councils are taking action by seeking to set energy eYciency targets for new residential buildingsin their emerging spatial strategies. However, CLG has changed its planning policies recently to expresslyrestrict this (see PPS Climate Change).

Defra’s plans to repeal HECA are mentioned elsewhere in this document.

The biggest barriers to some renewable technologies is the planning system, and there is a substantial gapbetween the varying high level policies of sustainability adopted by local authorities and the everydaydecisions made by their planning departments and councillors. There is a lack of understanding of therapidly changing technology of renewable energy or the increased need for energy eYciency and sustainableenergy in buildings.

In the recent past, around 30% of renewable planning applications were refused. This is worse in somekey technologies: 60% of wind farms are refused and biomass projects have particular problems obtainingpermission (Cabinet OYce Policy and Innovation Unit figures for 2000). Even humble domestic solarinstallations can fall foul of the system; installers say that some councils insist on the requirement of planningpermission, even when this is not really necessary as the installation should be permitted development.According to Southern Solar, a leading installer of solar thermal in the South East, around 20% ofhouseholders give up the idea of installing solar when faced with the eVort and cost of a planningapplication.

The government has declared that it will shortly publish its Permitted Development guidelines for micro-generation technologies. The policy will hopefully solve the problem somewhat. However, some micro-generation technologies will end up in the planning system because they are planning matters that cannotbe covered by permitted development rights. Some technologies can be intrusive (such as micro-windturbines) while some, such as solar panels, can change the appearance of a building. Or it may be that theapplication is so large that it is disputable how “micro” an installation really is.

In addition, permitted development rights are to a certain degree in abeyance in Conservation Areas,which cover a surprising large part of urban Britain. These areas, with their varying and subjective standardson “visual impact” are a particular barrier to wind and solar technologies.


Readers of this document will be familiar with the background to the much delayed publication of thePPS; how campaigns had to be run to improve previous drafts, how energy eYciency standards werespecifically singled out as beyond a planner’s remit, to how the Merton Rule was threatened, and muchbeside. The question now is: is the PPS a help or a hindrance to producing low carbon development? Theanswer must be yes to the former overall, despite all its faults. The second question is: will the PPS achieveits objectives? The answer to that must be no, because CLG are quite glib about the resources needed byplanners, developers and building material suppliers to satisfy the implications of the PPS.

One of the criticisms of the previous drafts of the PPS was that it made an ostentatious point of demandingthat local planning authorities (LPAs) fully consider climate change in their spatial strategies but at the sametime did not give them adequate powers to demand this from individual developments. To a degree thisdiscrepancy is still there, but planners’ powers over developers have been reinforced to a degree wheredevelopment control oYcers and builders, if they knew what they were doing, could produce a satisfactoryoutcome in carbon emissions terms under certain (proscribed) circumstances.

The PPS repeats the recent decision by CLG to separate who controls what when it comes to imposingstandards on buildings and their sites, that is, LPAs control spatial planning (subject to central governmentpolicy statements, Regional Plans and government inspectors; while central government controls BuildingRegulations (subject to enforcement by local authority Building Control inspectors). CLG seems to thinkthis is clear and logical. However, in energy, or carbon emissions or even in building construction terms, itis nonsense. A designer works out the energy demand of a building, then minimises emissions throughpractical energy eYciency measures and supplies the rest of the energy demand from renewables or low-carbon sources. This view fits with the previous concept of planning that it should attempt, where possible


and viable, to make buildings better than Building Regulations, which are a one-size-fits-all minimumstandard. To a certain degree, the PPS goes back to this idea by allowing planners to specify an “energystandard” (energy eYciency is implied) higher than Building Regulations in certain circumstances.However, this is very restricted to certain tightly drawn geographical areas, has to be justified in local terms(not properly defined) and announced in a high-level document which has to pass the government inspector.In other words, the PPS makes it very diYcult and unlikely that councils will succeed in achieving this asa policy.

The Merton Rule and the PPS

The PPS uses a version of the original “Merton Rule” but applies it to “decentralised energy” in general(see PPS glossary). CLG have watered down the Merton Rule because there is no guidance as to whetherLPAs can still require a percentage of energy/carbon reduction to come from renewables.

In addition the PPS has used an energy-based target approach rather than an emissions target base whichMerton has subsequently moved to, to discourage electric heating. However, it seems at last that LPAs cannow apply the Rule all over their area, instead of a restricted part.

The uncertainty created by earlier drafts of the PPS has led to the worry that the supporting documentsexplaining the PPS may well still weaken the Merton Rule. ACE is therefore supporting Michael FallonMP’s Planning and Energy Bill which aims to allow councils to require a percentage of energy in all newdevelopments to be generated by on-site renewables and to set higher energy eYciency standards.

This Bill will enshrine the Merton Rule in law, thus preventing it from being undermined in the futureand provide the certainty that the industry needs in order to secure investment.

It will ensure that the decisions on standards are taken locally—but by using the term “reasonable” theBill will also NOT allow councils to set unreasonable standards in order to frustrate government policy.Linking the standards to the Code will avoid the argument often advanced by the HBF (based upon nosupplied evidence—despite 18 months of requests for such evidence) that a plethora of diVerent standardswill be used by LPAs up and down the country.

The Bill will also allow councils to set high reasonable energy eYciency standards)—an important issuethat was not dealt with in the recent PPS.

Together these polices will help to reduce carbon emissions from new development.

CHP and district schemes

Very importantly for existing CHP systems, the PPS now apparently allows them to force a developer toinclude them in their existing scheme (paragraph 27). However, this is seriously undermined by a statementin paragraph 28 that plans do “not restrict those with responsibility for providing energy to newdevelopment, or the occupiers, to any one energy provider in perpetuity”. While this appears like an anti-monopoly measure this is really a cop out. The large speculative property developers in the UK are veryreluctant to join district CHP schemes and will use this to avoid compulsion. If the government is worriedabout district schemes exploiting their position it should regulate them. No one expects a choice of waterutility and it should be the same with heat and power.

Energy EYciency in the PPS

In the first draft of the PPS, LPAs were only allowed to specify an “energy standard” (energy eYciencyis implied) higher than Building Regulations in certain circumstances. This was very restricted to certaintightly drawn geographical areas (site-specific major developments), had to be justified in local terms (notproperly defined) the extra costs and possible eVect on supply had to be considered (which the developercould challenge) and the policy had to be set out in a high-level document which has to pass the governmentinspector. In our view, the PPS is worded to ensure that it was very diYcult and expensive for councils tosucceed in achieving this as a policy.

Unfortunately, the final version of the PPS is only slightly better than previous versions. It still does notallow authorities the discretion to set blanket requirements for their area if it is deemed reasonable to do so.(After, of course, the usual development plan process.) Without this specific permission authorities will stillface the prospect of blanket requirements being deleted by inspectors, because they are blanket. This istherefore a very diVerent regime to one where a specific requirement relating to a specific development maybe deleted by an inspector. In short the former (blanket with exceptions to be deleted) implies a presumptionin favour of energy eYciency while the latter (blanket requirements not allowed) implies a presumptionagainst energy eYciency.

In paragraphs 31 and 32 it says that LPAs are able to set a level of a “nationally described sustainablebuildings standards” (such as the Code for Sustainable Homes) in specific developments under specific localcircumstances, although it is very coy about mentioning the words “energy eYciency” which is mentioned as


an “energy standard” in a footnote (number 26) to paragraph 32 which states: “Where planning authoritiesconsider that local circumstances do not justify specifying a whole Code level they can stipulate arequirement solely in relation to the energy standard at an identified level of the Code”. This is the onlymention of energy eYciency in these circumstances, and there are no examples given of local circumstanceswhere higher levels could be asked for.

A development area is defined in the PPS glossary as “part of a planning authority’s area wheredevelopment is anticipated, which could be an urban extension or town centre”. So there has been a slightimprovement on previous drafts, in that the area allowed is now bigger than a specific site, and a “localcircumstances” policy could be tacked on to an area development plan document (such as a town centreredevelopment plan).

Consequential Improvements are missed out of the PPS

It is most disappointing that LPAs cannot use applications for major refurbishments or buildingextensions to make realistic demands that carbon emissions from the rest of the site are lowered, by theexisting buildings being brought up to higher energy eYciency standard and or by the addition ofmicrogeneration (Consequential Improvements). There is a very odd sentence in paragraph 25: “Whereareas and sites perform poorly, planning authorities should consider whether their performance could beimproved”. But there is no power anywhere given to enable the LPA to impose changes on existing sites,except by incremental additions of new development. This all seems like a major missed opportunity by CLGas the vast majority of planning applications are for extensions and alterations. The previous housingminister infamously pulled Consequential Improvements from the last Building Regulations update, so itcannot be claimed that this is covered by Building Regulations.

LPAs banned from specifying low-carbon building materials

As in previous drafts, there is a complete ban on local requirements for sustainable buildings with regardsto construction materials, fixtures and fittings. This clause (in paragraphs 32 and also 45) stops councilsspecifying use of sustainable timber and banning energy-intensive materials such as aluminium. It is clearlya concession to the major developers.

“Testing local requirements”

Previously, LPAs have tended to put renewables policies such as the Merton Rule in SupplementaryPlanning Documents. This is a quicker and easier process than adopting higher-level documents and doesnot need the approval of the government inspector. This has to stop, according to the PPS. Paragraph 33states that:

“Any policy relating to local requirements for decentralised energy supply to new development orfor sustainable buildings should be set out in a DPD [a higher-level document], not asupplementary planning document, so as to ensure examination by an independent inspector”.

CLG should announce that current Supplementary Planning Documents concerning sustainable energyare valid until replaced eventually by a DPD.


Delivery of Article 4 of the EU Directive on energy performance of buildings in the UK is mainly throughrevised Building Regulations (April 2006). However, there is evidence that building control is not enforcingthe relevant parts of the regulations and irresponsible builders have been able to get away with floutingminimum energy and emission standards. Surveys have shown that 1 in 2 new houses currently fail to meetthe current Part L standards.67

ACE has received anecdotal evidence, in confidence, that competition in the provision of building controlservices has eVectively corrupted the system of enforcement. For some time in England, and since this yearin Scotland, council building control inspectors compete with commercial “independent” ApprovedInspectors to sign oV new buildings. It has been put to us that if an inspector proves “obstructive” to adeveloper (eg insists on full compliance, including Part L); on the next development the builder will employ

67 But only 1 in 3 homes—it being very diYcult for studio flats to fail. See http://www.eeph.org.uk/uploads/documents/partnership/Building%20Regs%20Compliance%20Report%20Oct%2004.pdf and http://www.eeph.org.uk/uploads/documents/partnership/Building%20Regs%20Part%20L1%202002%20Compliance%20Research%20May%2006.pdf


a “tame” professional to sign oV his buildings for compliance. This is perfectly legal, and apparently howmost large builders operate. Contrast this with Scotland where until this year local authority BuildingControl had a monopoly for checking, and where there are far fewer concerns about compliance.

Along with a reform of building control services there needs to be random pressure testing for new homes,which would act as a powerful deterrent to rogue builders who are otherwise cutting corners. It is importantthat pressure testing of new dwellings is suYciently frequent to make builders believe that there is a realchance that their building will be tested. This measure was proposed by the government in the BuildingRegulations Consultation Paper68 and we warmly endorse it.


These are the resource-eYcient methods that councils can use to save energy and carbon emissions:

Energy EYciency in the community

The Home Energy Conservation Act requires local authorities to set up plans to move towards a 30%improvement in the energy eYciency of all the housing stock in their area across a 15-year period and that15-year period concludes in the year 2010. A significant number of councils have already achieved the targetor will do soon, but an even larger number are seriously behind, and two have never reported their figures.Despite these problem councils, the returns which have to be made each year do demonstrate very clearlythat those local authorities that are prepared to show commitment can actually deliver on this.

Around the country there are all sorts of very good HECA-related projects linked to councils happeningon the ground, which are delivering carbon savings. EST and the Practical Help website list many of these.A few are featured in the annex in the form of case studies.

The government has the target that by 2020 the general level of energy eYciency of residentialaccommodation has been increased by at least 20% compared with the general level of such energy eYciencyin 2010.

While the Energy EYciency Commitment has been very successful in terms of reaching the given targets,we are some way to go before every home in the UK is treated to make it warm and cheaper to heat. Evenamongst the eligible householders, reach has been patchy because of the proliferation of short-lived specialoVers and marketing schemes from the energy suppliers.69 There is also the credibility barrier—manyhouseholders cannot believe that a utility which exists to make profits out of selling units of electricity orgas would actually subsidise energy-saving measures that cut fuel bills.

In contrast to the energy suppliers, surveys have shown that written statements from local authorities areconsidered to be more trustworthy and oYcial letters are read. For this reason, joint promotion schemes ofEEC installations have been very successful.

One promotion has been of a Council Tax reduction for householders installing energy-saving measures.This measure has attracted widespread support—including from many local authorities. With support fromEST’s Innovation programme, Fenland District Council is oVering council tax rebates to households thatinstall energy eYciency measures. In other places British Gas is oVering to split the cost of the rebate withcouncils as part of its EEC promotion.

The government has announced that there will be a doubling of CERT (2008–11) over EEC-2 (2005–08),and a corresponding increase in the (hard-to-reach) Priority Group. The energy suppliers do notunderestimate the diYculties of reaching these targets. An alliance with each local authority may be the onlyway forward.

HECA and non-domestic buildings

The government has the target that by the end of 2010 the general level of energy usage in the commercialand public services sectors has reduced by at least 10% compared with the general level of such energy usagein 2005 and by the end of 2020 by at least 10% compared with the general level of such energy usage in 2010.There is currently a vacancy in the role regarding coordinating local energy saving in commercial buildings.ACE suggests widening HECA to cover energy use in all buildings in the area.

68 Proposals for amending Part L of the Building Regulations and Implementing the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive(July 2004).

69 So measures are largely installed by householders in the know and with the disposable income to pay the (albeitsubsidised) price.


Area-based approach

Schemes organised for a specific geographical area—like Warm Zones—could be the answer. Theseschemes can combine the credibility of the council, with the money of the energy supplier (plus possibly anystate housing renovation money), plus the word of mouth endorsement of the community, and the localknowledge of the installers and community groups. DiVerent contact methods, including door to door visits,can be used and needy individuals can be helped to obtain resources from third parties (state benefits andaccess to programmes such as Warm Front) which, with insulation measures, can help move them out offuel poverty.

Powergen’s “Heat Streets” scheme promotes energy advice and the installation of energy conservationmeasures in private sector housing in geographical target areas. Typically these are older dwellings with highnumbers of low income households or areas with more modern housing but poor energy eYciency standardswith a reasonable number of low income households. The “Heat Streets” initiative has been piloted in atleast three local authority areas.

Another example of an area-based approach is Cornwall’s Healthy Homes which is featured in the annex.

Energy Performance Certificates in domestic properties

The introduction of Energy Performance Certificates provides an opportunity for councils to use thisinformation to provide advice to householders on agencies that can oVer energy saving measures. Theycould also use the information to pinpoint or target where work is needed. It is absolutely vital for co-ordination with energy companies to find suitable homes to receive EEC/CERT measures.

Much has been made about problems of data security. This shows a lack of understanding of the DataProtection Act, which is about the security of data kept on people. The Energy Performance Certificatesrefer only to individual properties.

ESCOs based on utilities

Ultimately, if the government will enforce energy savings from the utilities using “cap and trade”, theenergy suppliers should move to being ESCOs (energy services companies) in alliance with councils, andproviding for each household levels of warmth and ability to power an agreed number of appliances. Unliketoday, where a customer is just a number on a computer file, and the relationship purely transactional,ESCOs, to provide their services adequately, will have to know their customers, their lifestyles and the stateof their property. It will be cheaper for the ESCO, after a certain point, to avoid expensive investment inincreasing energy generation by helping their customers reduce demand. This has happened in Californiawhere utilities have provided low-cost solar panels for customers at the edge of their distribution network,rather than build a new power station. An example of an ESCO produced in alliance with local governmentis the London ESCO contract, won by EDF and backed by the London Mayor.

Town Planning and Development Control

Several advanced local planning authorities70 have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, aSupplementary Planning Document containing guidance on renewable energy (either as a stand-alonepolicy or as part of a wider sustainability SPD) to help them make planning decisions and to advisehouseholders and businesses on what is accepted and why. Several councils are attempting to set carbonemission limits for new development. Unfortunately, recent pronouncements by CLG ministers and theirinspectors responding to individual draft spatial plans show the government intends to restrict this.

The Planning Policy Statement and Code for Sustainable Homes have major implications for PlanningDepartments on both the policy and development control sides. However, according to ministers, councilswill receive no new money or powers (that could be used to raise revenues).71 Within the next eight years,the government’s intention is to make sure that every single new home is a zero-carbon home, but unlessmore resources go into hard-pressed Planning and Building Control departments, then it is going to be verydiYcult to see how that is going to be achieved.

There is a recognised problem of a widespread lack of knowledge or experience in planning departmentsin handling the new technology of renewable energy or the subject of energy eYciency. Unfortunately,resources are often lacking (especially in small district councils) to develop knowledge and policies in thesefields. There have been attempts by outsiders to help the planners. The best example is the DTI’s “Its OnlyNatural” programme which aims to educate planners and councillors on the technology of renewablesthrough a website and seminars around the country. Various other pieces of work are going on, supportedby the regional bodies and local energy agencies. This is probably inadequate and too patchy for the task.government ministers have asked why more local planning authorities have not adopted Planning Policy

70 Examples include Lewes and Croydon.71 Speeches and responses to questions by Ruth Kelly Dec 2006 and April 2007.


Statement 22 (on-site renewables in new development) as a local planning requirement. The answer is: theLPAs do not know enough about renewable energy—indeed any energy—to properly enforce the policy.Therefore they avoid it.

As an employer

Councils are major employers in their local area. Councils can also influence contractors’ workforces.Low-cost education schemes on saving energy not only help corporate bills, but there is some evidence thatthe employees use the techniques in their own homes.

Own estate

The rating and bold public display of energy certificates on public buildings and buildings regularlyaccessed by the public, when combined with engaging communication strategies and events, are an excellentmeans to raise awareness and demonstrate how residential energy users can make a diVerence. This isparticularly true in schools, where students can see improvements to their own building, make changes intheir own behaviour, and take these lessons home to influence energy used in the household. The EuropeanDisplayTM Campaign is a voluntary scheme designed by energy experts from 20 European towns and citiesand supported by ACE’s research department. It is aimed at encouraging local authorities to publiclydisplay the energy and environmental performances of their public buildings using the same energy label(additionally covering carbon emissions and water use) that is used for household appliances. AcrossEurope to date, 303 local authorities have labelled 7,051 buildings under the Campaign.

Back in 2002, the Councils for Climate Protection pilot (CCP)—led by the IDeA—provided specialistsoftware linked to training and support which enabled the pilot councils to build up inventories of CO2

emissions for their own in-house activities and their areas, to consider diVerent future scenarios and todevelop programmes of action to cut emissions. IDeA still advises councils and runs the Beacon Councilscheme on Sustainable Energy (2005–06) and Climate Change (2007–08).72 The influence of this scheme hasbeen fairly limited in terms of action taken by non-Beacon councils, but this may increase if councils arerequired to take climate change seriously through a performance indicator or similar.

When presented with a funding crisis following the tax ruling last year, EST, following the pattern ofmany organisations, axed external programmes which involved few core staV. This included the LocalAuthority Support Programme, whose pilots had been running for several years, based in severalindependent Energy EYciency Advice Centres. The role of the programme was to advise LAs on assistinghouseholders to reduce their consumption of energy—usually through setting up joint projects. As EST hasbeen given responsibility by central government to persuade householders to reduce their consumption ofenergy, this programme should be restored.

The Carbon Trust low carbon advice programme is very limited in the sense that it only takes in about adozen councils a year. The Carbon Trust Salix fund for councils making energy eYciency improvements isalso very limited (currently worth only around £20m) and needs to be drastically expanded to help the 400plus councils.

As a driver to seriously tackle energy costs, all local authorities (above tertiary level) should be includedin the mandatory Carbon Reduction Commitment scheme (CRC), so such authorities are taking an exemplarrole. Only a minority of over 400 local authorities are estimated to meet the criteria to enter the CRC schemeas described in the recent Defra consultation document. ACE wants all local authorities, including many ofthe smaller ones that have been exemplars in energy eYciency, included, as an example to others and to,ultimately, save public money through energy eYciency. Councils are severely restricted on capital andexpenditure, and so may have the only option of paying up for the carbon with a cut of their services tobalance the books, so the monies received should be recirculated in the form of grants to fund improvements.

Many local authorities have already been taking the “monitor and manage” approach to energy use, andshould be rewarded for taking this initiative, for example, via compensation for occupying only the topquartile eYcient buildings (as apparently is central government’s objective).

Council Tax reduction for householders installing energy-saving measures

This measure has attracted widespread support as an EEC promotion. There is also merit in considering avariety of Council Tax mechanisms—a rebate or discount on the Council Tax bill for householders installingenergy-saving measures; a system of Council Tax “low emission” bands (based on EPCs); and/or a CouncilTax surcharge on dwellings in, say, the G and H bands where householders refuse to sign up for a packageof energy eYciency measures.

72 Woking has the distinction of being a Beacon in both rounds.


Annex

EXAMPLES LOCAL AUTHORITY ACTION ON ENERGY AND CARBON EMISSIONS

Knowsley Heat Streets is an EEC-funded scheme set up by the council to ensure owner-occupiers andthose who privately rent have the opportunity to benefit from improving energy eYciency in their homes.The scheme is targeted to neighbourhoods suVering from high levels of fuel poverty and ultimately will rollout across the Borough. Assistance towards the installation of energy eYciency measures is available andbetween 50% and 100% grant may be available depending on availability of finances.

Cornwall Healthy Homes is a very successful community project to tackle fuel poverty, set up by the localenergy eYciency advice centre in partnership with most of the districts in Cornwall. It was initially part-funded by the EST Innovation Fund. It has been copied successfully in Sussex and elsewhere.

Woking Borough Council is often given as an example of a council leading the way on sustainable energy.Their fame is mainly because of their town centre CHP system with private wire. What is often overlookedis that they have achieved their 2010 HECA target already, by using a combination of council grants andjoint projects with the local energy eYciency advice centre.

In the 2003 the then Leader of Woking Borough council wrote:

“Local government faces many challenges in providing the basic services to residents at anaVordable price. But over and above this it needs to set out long-term objectives for theenvironmental quality of life that it wants to retain and enhance within its boundary”.73

Woking is one of the top local authorities on achieving energy eYciency and investing in renewable energy.Woking has probably the largest Solar PV array in the UK, integrated into its town centre CHP system, ithas a building-based fuel cell and several CHP engines in central Woking and in other community buildingsaround the borough.

Woking has produced an impressive climate change strategy to achieve ambitious reductions ingreenhouse gas emissions. The council frequently describes the environmental and financial benefits to thepeople of Woking of the action taken on energy by the council over the last 17 years. Much information isavailable directly from Woking, and for reasons of space it will not be reproduced in this document.

Leicester City Council has some very ambitious environmental commitments to reduce energy and wateruse in its buildings. The Council is committed to halving the amount of energy it was using in 1990 by 2025and aims to get 20% of all its energy from renewable systems by 2020. For many years Leicester City Councilhas played an active role in encouraging and supporting measures that protect the environment. This wasrecognised in 1990, when Leicester became Britain’s first “Environment City”. Leicester City Council hassince adopted a number of “green” policies, ensuring that its own services and activities meet the highstandards it encourages others to adopt.

Memorandum submitted by Warwickshire County Council

Introduction

We welcome the opportunity to submit our views on such an important issue as climate change andrecognise that as a nation we have less than 10 years in which to make fundamental changes that will reduceour emissions of green house gases.

There are a few introductory points we would like to make:

The County Council has appointed a climate change champion, Councillor Gordon Collett.

As an authority we are getting better at coordination and are building momentum through theWarwickshire Climate Change Partnership.

We have developed a strategy and action plan (containing 48 projects at present) in Warwickshire andhave had over 8,000 hits per month on the web site, so we are trying to spread best practice as much aspossible. The first edition of our community newsletter was issued in December and has been well receivedby community groups.

We are still not doing enough on adaptation. We have not even been able to establish our local climateimpact profile yet so do not know how much it costs local authorities in Warwickshire to respond to extremeweather events.

We need stronger Government support to be eVective—it will help to make it a legal requirement for localauthorities to take action on climate change.

73 Woking Climate Change Strategy March 2003.


1. How can central government best support and encourage local authorities, regional government and devolvedadministrations to take action on mitigation and adaptation, and other climate change related areas like wasteand transport? What funding, powers and structures are required to improve joined up delivery of climate changepolicy at all levels of government?

There is a serious lack of management in the deployment of short and long term economic advice. In thepast two years, Government has sought and received advice from two respected economists—Kate Barkeron the short term housing supply issue and Sir Nicholas Stern on the longer term impacts of climate changeon the economy. Lack of any discernable reconciliation of these two pieces of advice has been raised as aserious issue by the County Council in its responses to Government on the draft Supplement to PPS1 onclimate change and on the Planning White Paper. The concern was that there are inherent conflicts betweenthe former’s arguments for a lighter touch on development from the planning system and the latter’s callfor more requirements to be imposed on development.

The hope was that, through the final PPS1 Supplement on Climate Change and the new PPS4 on“Planning for sustainable Economic Development”, this conflict would be managed—rather than leavingit to be decided in the case of individual planning applications or local development document. It nowappears from the final version of the PPS1 Supplement and the consultation version of PPS4 that it will beleft to local government and planning inspectors to decide national policy on a case by case basis. This doesnot help our national climate change objectives.

Other points Government should consider:

— Provide leadership, national strategy and policy and an action plan. The climate change Bill is astart but needs filling out with consistent policies.

— There should be a legal requirement for local authorities to tackle climate change.

— There should be more regional coordination of county/sub-regional activity with upwardreporting mechanisms.

— The provision of easy methodologies for reporting. It needs to continue to make data availableand provide help with interpretation where necessary. The Carbon Trust should be encouraged togive county based data on local actions. Local government needs a consistent baseline and goodquality statistics to track statistics over time and set local targets. The quality of released statisticsneeds to be consistent year on year. They are not at the moment.

— There should be more focus on ensuring that the skills needed to deliver a low carbon future areproperly resourced and prioritised to ensure that the skilled workforce is available. Many localauthorities do not have suYciently skilled staV to work out baselines and identify future targets.There is a national shortage of energy professionals to deliver a low carbon future.

2. Is there clarity about the role played by local authorities, regional governments and devolved administrationsin tackling climate change? How can their actions be coordinated and monitored? How can the accountabilityand transparency of response at a local level be improved? How eVective has the Nottingham Declarationprocess been?

A clear statement from Government that tackling climate change is a top priority for local governmentwould be helpful, followed through with consistent targets and funding streams. At the moment we have tomeet a number of potentially conflicting targets. eg build more schools as cheaply as possible.

There is no clear role in this area for local authorities, or regional bodies (AWM, Sustainability WM,GOWM, WMRA). Who is supposed to do what? How are these regional bodies going to support us in whatwe are trying to do? At present they seem to keep asking us what we are doing.

Signing up to the Nottingham Declaration initiated Warwickshire CC’s climate change work but it isessentially declaratory. A lot of authorities have done little or nothing since signing it.

Signing up to the Carbon Trust Local Authority Carbon Management Action Plan did more to generatediscussion and engage senior management in Warwickshire than signing the Nottingham Declaration did.


Yes there does need to be a more explicit reference to climate change in the local government performanceframework.

The new performance indicators will help to stimulate action, but the subject as a whole remains adiscretionary activity for local authorities and therefore is subject to the inevitable budget pressures whenset against statutory duties in the contexts of “capping” and “Gershon eYciencies”.

Statutory duties in relation to climate change are needed. They need to be clear and relevant anddeliverable by local government.


4. To what extent should there be disaggregated targets for diVerent levels of government? How shouldindependent targets, for example Scotland will set its own emissions target for 2050 (80% reduction rather thanthe UK target of 60%) and the Greater London Authority has committed itself to making a 60% cut by 2030,fit together with national carbon targets and budgets? How can Government monitoring and forecasting ofemissions be improved so as to disaggregate emissions and the impact of carbon reductions policies, in diVerentregions and nations?

We do not see any problem of having extended targets, as long as all the administrations have a minimumtarget set by the UK Government. Regional and Local Government should have power to implement theirown “stretch” targets if they wish.

In Warwickshire we have a 60% reduction target by 2050, but 2005 statistics compared with 2003–04statistics (there is a two year time lag in statistics availability) show that CO2 emissions have increased overtime. 4.6 million tonnes in 2003, to 5.312 millions tonnes in 2004 and 5.323 million tonnes in 2005. The trendshould be treated with care due to data limitations referred to and to improvements in data quality. Howeverthere looks like there will be a gap between what Warwickshire emissions need to be by 2050 to meet thetarget and modelling the future results of current Government legislation. At present we are assuming thatwe have to meet this gap by local actions if national measures are not suYcient.

5. How advanced and co-ordinated are local, regional and national programmes of adaptation to climatechange? What support is there for adaptation? How vulnerable to climate change are the local authorities,regional government and devolved administrations?

We have our own Warwickshire Climate Change Strategy but if we stand any chance of successfullyadapting to change, we need the support of those professional bodies who can recommend, influence andchange specifications for basic local authority services such as highways, waste management, constructionstandards etc. Without these agreed standards “future proofing” infrastructure and services will be diYcultas insuYcient resources will be devoted to a project. This will make local authorities more vulnerable toclimate change in the future.


As well as having the relevant scientific, business and financial representation, the Committee needs to berepresentative, as all levels of local/regional/devolved government have a significant role to play in deliveringGHG reduction targets. Identification with the Committee and its objectives is important if they are to beenthusiastically delivered.


The greatest barrier is not knowing what to do first. The other related barrier is the mixed signals that aregiven out by Government eg on renewables, are they a national priority or not?

Existing planning policies are too equivocal and there are too many contradictions and loopholes in thelegislation and an over reliance on market forces to deliver.

In addition there are conflict between some national policies and sustainable development. Airports/newmotorways and carbon reduction do not go together and it is diYcult to accurately measure carbonreductions of some community based measures.


The impact will be limited. Most of its advice is already embedded in to the planning system. If anythingthe PPS is following best practice, rather than informing and driving it forward.

Our response to question one is also relevant here.


Our, anecdotal, evidence suggests that these parts of the building regulations are being largely ignored.Are building control oYcers suYciently qualified to fully understand the Carbon Index? Where selfcertification is permitted we wonder what is really happening.



The “Cashback” scheme for schools administered by the Energy Saving Trust was an excellent “lighttouch” mechanism to provide funding for local authority energy saving schemes. When they were given thelocal authority remit, the Carbon Trust suspended the scheme and after a vacuum of a number of yearsreplaced it with the Salix Scheme. This scheme is much less flexible and is not encouraging innovation bylocal authorities.

In relation to good practice there is now a lot of good practice about—see case studies on the Partnershipwebsie. These include:

— Warwick Wind Trials.

— The biomass market development work.

— “Switch it oV” campaign.

— Eco-congregations.

— Transition towns initiative.

— Environmental/climate change art challenge.

— Home energy eYciency projects.

— School energy projects.

— Local grants for renewables.

— Eliot Park Innovation Centre.

— Kingsbury Water Park.

— SMART metering at Bayton Road.

— Leicester Lane recycling.

— Onley Goods Again Project.

— The Pride in Camp Hill Regeneration Programme.

Annex 1

There are currently 103 organisations represented across Warwickshire by people who are either activepartners or who have expressed an interested in being kept informed on a monthly basis of Partnershipactivities.

Further information about the Partnership, details of projects, case studies copies of our publications andcommunity newsletter can be found on our website http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/climatechangepartnership

5 February 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Department for the Environment (Northern Ireland)

General

1. As for other devolved regions, public policy drivers on climate change in Northern Ireland depend ona mix of reserved and transferred policies, programmes and schemes. For example, relevant fiscal policy egmotor, vehicle duty, is determined in Westminster not Stormont. On the other hand, energy policy isdevolved to the NI Assembly, but this is not the case for Scotland and Wales. Within my own Department’sremit, planning policy is also devolved.

2. Northern Ireland’s population is 2.9% of the UK’s with greenhouse gas emissions estimated to be 3.2%of the UK total for 2005. Northern Ireland is a unique region within the UK given its geographical positionand its land boundary with the Republic of Ireland. There are therefore distinctive economic, social andenvironmental interactions and dependencies that are unique within the UK. An example of this would bethe establishment of an All Island Energy Market.

3. Northern Ireland has a largely rural population with a higher dependency on agriculture than otherUK regions. Road transport is essential to meet the social and economic needs of the population.

4. The primary focus for the NI Executive in its first Programme for Government (2008–11) will be togrow the economy. A key goal will be to half the productivity gap with the UK average (excluding the SouthEast of England) by 2015. This will be in the context of a key environmental goal to reduce greenhouse gasemissions by 25% by 2025. The possible tension between these goals is the subject of some current researchwhich it is hoped will report in the next few months.


5. NI Industry in general suVers from higher energy costs than many competitor regions and is thereforemore sensitive than other areas to any increase in those costs.

6. In terms of emissions the Northern Ireland inventory for 1990–2005 shows that:

— emissions from the energy sector represent 74% of greenhouse gas emissions. This is lower thanthe UK average of 86% because Northern Ireland does not have refineries, iron and steel industry,and coal mining;

— carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector represent over 30% of the total, and this hasrisen by 44% since 1990, compared with a 9.9% rise in the rest of the UK;

— emissions from agriculture represent 22% of greenhouse gas emissions compared to the UKaverage of 7%; and

— manufacturing and construction emissions represent 8.5% of the Northern Ireland carbon dioxideemissions compared to the UK average of 15.3%.

Working with Whitehall Departments

7. There are generally very good relations between Northern Ireland Ministers and oYcials with ourWhitehall, Scottish and Welsh counterparts in developing strategy, policies and legislation to meet theclimate change agenda. This can be evidenced by:

— participation in the UK Climate Change Bill, including joint appointments of the Chair andmembers of the Committee on Climate Change;

— participation in the UK Climate Change Programme;

— development of the UK Carbon Reduction Commitment trading schem;

— the sharing of scientific knowledge and tools for adaptation by UK Climate ImpactsProgramme; and

— policy development and implementation of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.

8. In terms of EU policies, Defra colleagues consult on agreed UK lines when entering into negotiationson behalf of the UK with the Commission and Member States. A good example of this work is to developa negotiating position on the EU Commission’s Energy and Climate Change Package.

Practical Issues

9. There are a number of practical issues that need to be taken into account and managed whenconsidering Westminster-Northern Ireland Assembly interactions.

10. Government organisational accountabilities are not identical within the devolved settlements of theUK. Hence, as indicated, energy policy is devolved in Northern Ireland, but this is not the case in eitherScotland or Wales. Northern Ireland also has a greater number of government departments (11) under theNorthern Ireland Act 1998, than is the case elsewhere and hence accountabilities can be with a number ofdiVerent Northern Ireland Ministers, where in other legislatures a single Minister may be accountable.Ministers are also bound by a Ministerial Code that, for issues of a cross-cutting nature, will requireExecutive Committee Agreement. In simple terms, this means that certain decisions cannot be made by asingle Minister in isolation, but need to be agreed by the Executive as a whole. Climate change issues aregenerally cross-cutting and would normally come under the terms of the Code.

11. Local government structures are very diVerent than in Great Britain with powers historically beingmuch more limited than is the case elsewhere. Whilst an ongoing Review of Public Administration inNorthern Ireland will reshape the relationship between central and local government, structures andaccountabilities will remain diVerent from those in GB.

12. In some specialist areas it would be impossible for devolved administrations to provide the expertcapacity for policy development. For example, for the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Northern IrelandoYcials depend on the work of Defra experts to provide advice on the best design features for the scheme.

UK Climate Change Bill

13. Before Christmas the Northern Ireland Assembly gave legislative consent for the provisions of theUK Climate Change Bill to be extended to Northern Ireland. The Bill provides in statute a very positive,constructive relationship between Westminster and Northern Ireland (and Wales/Scotland) in terms oftargets, budgets, trading schemes, reporting requirements, setting up and working with the Committee onClimate Change and on the adaptation issue. The statutory relationships will be supported by an agreedConcordat to assist all administrations in the achievement of the aims of the Act.


Conclusion

14. In my view the relationship between Westminster and the devolved administrations in the area ofclimate change is a constructive and eVective one. New arrangements to implement the UK Climate ChangeBill provide the appropriate accountability framework for the longer term.

10 March 2008

Memorandum submitted by the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change,Scottish Executive

Introduction

1. The Scottish Parliament was established in 1999 and has legislative competence for a wide range ofsubject matter, including the environment. The Parliament’s competence is defined by the Scotland Act andextends to all matters which are not explicitly reserved. In addition to passing primary legislation andscrutinising secondary legislation within devolved legislative competence, the Scottish Parliament alsooversees the exercise by the Scottish Ministers of powers which have been “executively devolved” on a caseby case basis by the UK Government. Executive devolution involves the transfer to the ScottishGovernment of powers and functions (including the power to make subordinate legislation) which wouldotherwise be exercised by UK Ministers. The Scottish Parliament cannot however make new law in suchareas and legislative competence remains with the UK Parliament.

2. As a result, the Scottish Government’s relationship with the UK Government is significantly diVerentfrom that of local authorities and regional government. It also diVers (most obviously in terms of the extentof devolved competence) from the relationship between the UK Government and the other devolvedadministrations in Wales and Northern Ireland. This reflects the fact that the UK has adopted a policy of“asymmetric devolution”.

3. It is worth noting that, where a matter is within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament,it remains possible for the Parliament to agree to the inclusion of devolved provisions within Westminsterlegislation. This is achieved by means of a Legislative Consent Motion. The ability to co-operate on newlegislation in this way is of particular relevance in the context of large-scale policies, such as action on climatechange, which span both territorial borders and the current boundary between devolved and reservedpowers. It is not, however, a substitute for the further formal devolution of powers to the ScottishParliament. The ability to make integrated new legislative provision, across a range of policy areas, in a waywhich addresses the specific opportunities and threats which exist in Scotland is of key importance for thefuture. The Scottish Government is therefore keen to work with the UK Government to achieve as much aspossible within the existing settlement, but believes that the devolution of further powers to Scotland wouldenhance our ability to achieve the overall outcomes which both governments seek.

4. A summary of Scotland’s climate change response is attached at Annex A. This highlights that, whilstthe Scottish Government has similar climate change objectives to the UK Government in terms of reducingemissions and adapting to the unavoidable impacts of climate change, in some areas our approach diVers.Proposals for an 80% emissions reduction target and targets for Scottish renewable generation to accountfor 31% of whole Scottish electricity demand by 2011, rising to 50% by 2020, are examples of where theScottish Government is being more ambitious in its approach. The Scottish Government believes there areeconomic growth opportunities from improving the environment and moving towards a low carboneconomy.

UK and Scottish Climate Change Bills

5. The Scottish Government is working with the UK Government and the other devolvedadministrations on the UK Climate Change Bill which will set a statutory target for the UK as a whole toreduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 60% by 2050 and by at least 26% by 2020. The targets in the UKBill apply to the UK as a whole and diVerent parts of the UK may make diVerent reductions.

6. The Scottish Government is consulting on proposals for a Scottish Climate Change Bill including astatutory target for Scotland to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050. Scotland’s achievement on reducingemissions will play a part in overall UK achievement. Scotland’s extra eVort could compensate for a slightlylower performance elsewhere in the UK so that together we meet the target. But it could also mean that theUK’s combined eVort exceeds the target. The onus will be on the UK administrations and the Committeeon Climate Change to develop our ability to disaggregate information to see how best the various parts ofthe UK might contribute.


7. Of course, our ability to meet our 80% emissions reduction target will be influenced by the contributionto emission reductions made in reserved policy areas. The less emissions are reduced through reserved policymeasures, the more we will need to achieve through devolved policy measures. The co-operation of the UKgovernment is therefore vital if Scotland is to achieve its climate change targets and relations are positive.

UK Committee on Climate Change

8. The UK Committee on Climate Change brings together experts from climate science and policy,economics, business competitiveness and financial management to provide expert advice on meetinggovernment climate change objectives. In that regard, it will be important for the UK Committee on ClimateChange to meet the needs of the Scottish Government and provisions in the UK Climate Change Bill areintended to ensure these needs are met. The Committee will be sponsored, funded and appointed by the fouradministrations. The Committee will give advice to the UK Government and to the devolvedadministrations, and the devolved administrations will be able to request specific advice from theCommittee. The four UK administrations and the Committee have a responsibility to make sure that therelationship works eVectively in practice over the decades to 2050 and beyond. The Scottish Governmentwill work with the Committee on our contribution to the UK target and intends to use the Committee as asource of advice on the Scottish target in the short term (around 2°–3 years), after which we shall review howwell this has served our needs and decide whether we need any additional advisory capacity for Scotland.

Working with the UK Government

9. There are many reasons for the Scottish Government to work constructively with the UK Governmentin responding to climate change. In many cases we are reliant on the capacity within the UK Governmentto lead on policy development and to provide expert analysis. By working together we can share expertiseand resources leading to a more eYcient, coordinated response. It is important that Scotland is making itscontribution to the UK climate change response and that reporting mechanisms are aligned so that the UKGovernment can fulfil its international obligations.

10. A coordinated response is relevant when considering adaptation to the impacts of climate changewhere infrastructure, such as road and rail networks, and biodiversity cross borders. Collaborating onscience and research can also be more eYcient and avoid duplication, and there are areas where Scotlandcan take a lead. For example, we commissioned research into the regional impacts of climate trends, and,given their importance in greenhouse gas emissions, we have undertaken innovative research into modellingpeat soils which are prominent in Scotland. Both these studies are now being taken forward on a UK basis.

11. In order to support action within Scotland, it is important for UK data, analysis and research to drawout the implications for Scotland. We work closely with the UK Government on this, and there is a trendtowards more disaggregation of information, such as the diasaggregated greenhouse gas inventories forEngland, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In some cases there are complexities with disaggregatingdata but it is important to find a solution to such problems to ensure that emissions reductions are achievedin the most cost eVective manner.

Ministerial Relations

12. The Scottish Ministers, not being members of UK Cabinet Committees, are not formally copied in toCabinet correspondence. However, Cabinet committees do discuss matters that impact directly on devolvedissues. It is important that we are consulted in good time about UK Cabinet business which aVects ourdevolved responsibilities. It is therefore vital that UK Government Ministers communicate with the ScottishGovernment quickly and comprehensively, advising of any proposals, and inviting Scottish Ministers tocomment or become involved at the earliest opportunity. The Chairman of the relevant Cabinet Committeeshould later write confirming the final decision taken in a “round-up” letter, which should summariseScottish Government views along with those of UK Ministers even where they diverge significantly. All ofthis is entirely in line with the UK Government’s own guidance as set out in Devolution Guidance Note 6.

13. UK Government Ministers write regularly to the Scottish Government on climate change matters.Early dialogue between UK and Scottish Government oYcials in advance of Ministerial correspondenceassists Scottish Government Ministers to respond within the often tight deadlines set. It also helps the UKGovernment to ensure that there are no late hitches in policy proposals. A constructive working relationshipbetween oYcials in the Scottish and UK Governments is therefore essential. In this regard it is necessary forUK Government oYcials to have a clear understanding of the nature of the devolution settlement and theneed to consult early on anything which bears on devolved interests, giving enough time for propercirculation and consideration of papers and proposals within the Scottish Government. Training and


guidance for oYcials are critical in this regard. Viewed across the board, there are many examples of goodpractice where the Scottish Government has been involved early in UK policy development that has abearing on devolved interests, but there are also examples where the Scottish Government is not engagedfully, or is consulted late, by counterparts in the UK Government.

Scotland Office

14. The Scotland OYce carries out a number of functions, including supporting delivery of practicaladjustments to the devolution settlement (by means of Scotland Act Orders) and liaising with the ScottishGovernment on the management of UK legislation which requires legislative consent. The Scotland OYcealso has an interest in a number of residual matters which remain within reserved competence (certainaspects of Energy and Transport policy being the most relevant examples in this context). The ScottishGovernment currently has a good working relationship with the Scotland OYce in relation to themanagement of day to day business. While the Scotland OYce is part of the UK Government’s internalmachinery, and its existence is therefore a matter for the UK Prime Minister, we do not believe that thecurrent arrangement is the most eYcient. We do work closely with the Scotland OYce to ensure that theexisting settlement works as well as is possible but the Scottish Government believes that there is no needfor a Scottish Secretary or a Scotland OYce. We think this role could be better carried out by a Ministerpositioned centrally within the UK Government.

Engagement with Europe

15. Much environment policy and regulation, including those covering climate change, are driven byEurope. The Scottish Government is determined to raise Scotland’s voice in Europe and to do this we areengaging with all of the relevant players in Europe. Scottish Government Ministers have engaged directlywith EU Commissioners on a number of occasions. However, as European policy matters are consideredreserved, the UK Government is responsible for representing the UK within the EU. Therefore it isimportant for Scottish Government representatives to work closely with their UK counterparts to ensurethat our interests are protected and adequately represented by the UK Government in Europeannegotiations.

16. Early warning and engagement by the UK Government on issues emerging from Europe that impacton Scottish interests (whether in reserved or devolved areas) are essential to ensure proper considerationof the proposals by the Scottish Government. Early engagement by the UK Government on the EuropeanCommission’s Climate action and renewable energy package is a recent example of good practice.

Scotland Act 1998

17. The Scotland Act has a direct bearing on our relationship with the UK Government on climatechange. Section 106 of the Scotland Act 1998 provides for a share of an international or Communityobligation which is expressed in quantitative terms to be transferred by Order to Scottish Ministers. TheKyoto Protocol is such an obligation. However, by working in partnership with the UK Government it hasnot been necessary to invoke this provision.

18. Section 57(2) of the Scotland Act provides that Scottish Ministers have no power to do any act sofar as the act is incompatible with Community law. Where Community law aVects domestic climate changemeasures, the Scottish Ministers must consider any potential risks which might arise as a consequence ofsection 57(2)—for example, the risk that actions taken may be held to have no legal eVect.

19. Under the Scotland Act, certain subject matter remains reserved to the UK Parliament and the UKGovernment. In some areas, the division of responsibility between the Scottish and UK Governments iscomplex. It is therefore important that the UK and Scottish administrations work cooperatively in order toavoid diYculties in the eVective delivery of policy. It is also essential to avoid any confusion overaccountability for outcomes. Responding to climate change involves the coordination of both devolved andreserved responsibilities across the economy, environment, energy, transport and housing. Extending andclarifying the powers of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government through further devolution wouldassist significantly in increasing the eVectiveness with which both Government and Parliament are able todeliver climate change action in Scotland. The impact of work being done by the Scottish Governmentwould benefit from greater flexibility, and from the opportunities to pursue policies which require aninterrelated suite of powers across a wide range of governmental functions. The Scottish Parliament wouldbe able to legislate with greater precision in relation to the particular threats and opportunities which exist


in Scotland, as well as holding the Scottish Government to account for delivering these policies. We willcontinue to make the case for further devolution of powers through the National Conversation while fullycooperating with the UK Government and the other devolved administrations to tackle climate change.

Energy Policy

20. Policy on energy is central to tackling climate change. The Scottish Government believes Scotlandcan be an international leader in renewable energy and has set an ambitious target that 50% of Scotland’selectricity demand should be met from renewable sources. We have stated our support of the EuropeanUnion’s target that 20% of energy should come from renewables by 2020, and that energy eYciency shouldimprove by 20% by 2020, and we are supporting the UK Energy Bill and European Union proposals oncarbon capture and storage.

21. However, the actions which the Scottish Government can take are limited by the powers that we haveunder the Scotland Act 1998. As we have stated in Choosing Scotland’s Future, our National Conversationwhite paper, “greater devolution over energy matters would allow the Scottish Parliament and ScottishGovernment to give priority to the optimal use of Scotland’s natural resources in considering future sourcesof energy, in improving Scotland’s eYciency in using energy, and in growing Scotland’s green energy sector”.At present, the development of renewables in Scotland is being hampered by an unfair and inappropriatetransmission charging regime, whilst support for new low carbon technology will suVer as a result of themassive amounts of money from taxpayers and consumers that will go to funding the construction,operation and decommissioning of a new generation of nuclear power stations. The Scottish Governmentalso wishes to take action to reduce carbon emissions from heat.

22. As indicated above, the range of actions open to the Scottish Government is limited by the currentdevolution settlement. Further control over energy powers and energy revenues would enable the ScottishGovernment to take the right decisions to meet our climate change objectives through the development ofa genuinely low carbon energy supply.

Conclusion

23. There is a close working relationship between the UK and Scottish Governments in relation toclimate change policy. The Scottish Government will continue to work constructively with the UKGovernment to play its part in helping the UK meet its climate change objectives. The UK Government canalso play a crucial role in supporting the Scottish Government in meeting its ambitious emission reductiontargets. The further devolution of powers in key areas would help make a valuable contribution in thisregard.

24. In moving forward, it will be important to maintain the good relationships that currently exist whilstcontinuing to look at ways in which the UK Government and the devolved administrations can work moreeVectively to achieve shared objectives of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and responding to the impactsof climate change.

Stewart StevensonMinister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change

20 March 2008

Annex A

CLIMATE CHANGE IN SCOTLAND

“Climate change threatens our people, our economy, our societies, and our veryexistence. It can only be tackled if we all work together— . . . in Scotland, in theUK, and across the world”.John Swinney, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable GrowthAnnouncing intentions for a Scottish Climate Change Bill—21 June 2007

Introduction

The Scottish Government’s purpose is to create a more successful country, with opportunities for all ofScotland to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth. Recognising that climate change isone of the most serious threats we face and being determined that Scotland will play its part in rising to thisglobal challenge, the Scottish Government is ensuring that action on climate change becomes part andparcel of the way Government and the wider public sector behaves.

While climate change policy in general is devolved to the Scottish Government, policies to tackle thisglobal issue cover a wide range of sectors and span both reserved and devolved matters. The ScottishGovernment works with the UK Government and the other devolved administrations in contributing toand influencing policy developments at UK, European, and international levels.


The Scottish Government Economic Strategyi sets the strategic direction for the public sector in Scotland—the Scottish Government, local government, the enterprise networks and other key delivery partners. Itintroduces strategic targets which combine raising the GDP growth rate with ambitions to reduce the levelof emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. This ambition is supported by the Scottish Budget SR 2007ii whichemphasises that all public spending programmes must take account of, and contribute towards, the actionneeded to meet emissions targets.

Scotland’s emissions have fallen. Between 1990 and 2005, net greenhouse gas emissions fell by around16% from 64.4 to 54.5 MtCO2e. As part of this reduction, net CO2 emissions fell by 13% compared witha UK average decrease of 6.4%. Encouraging as these figures are, on balance each person in Scotlandcurrently contributes twice the global average in emissions.

The highest emitting sectors in Scotland are energy generation, transport and business, collectively theycurrently account for around three quarters of Scottish emissions. Since 1990, energy supply emissionshave fallen by 10% and business emissions have fallen by 22%. However, in line with the rising trend inEurope, Scottish transport emissions have increased by 11%.

Scottish and UK Climate Change Bills

Central to our climate change commitments are proposals to set a statutory target for Scotland to reduceemissions by 80% by 2050, and to develop mechanisms to ensure sustained progress is made. To give eVectto this target, the Scottish Government is currently consulting on proposals for a Scottish Climate ChangeBilliii. The Bill is designed to provide a long-term legal framework, which will oVer business and investorsthe certainty needed to plan for a low-carbon economy. It also proposes a requirement that Ministers areheld to account in the event of failure to meet emissions reductions, with mandatory annual reporting toParliament. The Scottish Government anticipates introducing a draft Bill to Parliament in late 2008.

The Scottish Government is also working with UK partners on the UK Climate Change Billiv which willset a statutory target for the UK as a whole to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and possibly othergreenhouse gases, by at least 60% by 2050. The UK Bill provides a framework for shared action and hasbeen drafted in terms which recognise the role of the Scottish Government as a partner in the pursuit of theUK emissions reduction target. It does not specify the measures to be used in Scotland to achieve the targets.The Scottish Climate Change Bill will oVer an opportunity to put in place a statutory framework, additionalto the UK one, for a distinctive Scottish target and to introduce any relevant devolved policy measures whichrequire primary legislation. Actions taken under devolved Scottish powers to meet the Scottish target willalso help towards meeting the UK target. Similarly, there are areas such as energy generation for whichpowers have not been devolved but where UK Government climate change action could help Scotland meetthe Scottish target. The Scottish Parliament approved a Legislative Consent Motion for the UK Bill on20 December 2007.

Scotland’s Climate Change Programme

While the targets within the Climate Change Bill may be long-term, the actions to achieve them arerequired now. Scotland’s Climate Change Programmev, published in 2006, sets out the existing policies beingpursued to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. A first Annual Reportvi on progress on Scotland’sClimate Change Programme was laid before the Scottish Parliament in March 2007. The underlyingprinciples of this Programme remain valid—to tackle climate change in a sustainable way, to report annuallyon progress, to mainstream climate thinking across Government, to understand better the carbon impactof policies, to raise the profile of adaptation, and to communicate the importance of the issue much morewidely. A new programme will be required to deliver the more ambitious target in the proposed ScottishClimate Change Bill. The proposed Bill will sit above this programme and set the high level statutoryframework for climate change policies in Scotland.

Local Government

While the Scottish Government is committed to a wide programme of activity it is recognised that this isnot an issue that any government can address alone. Scotland’s communities will be in the front line inresponding to the impacts of climate change and also have a role to play in reducing emissions of greenhousegases that are contributing to climate change. Local government is ideally placed to lead the communityresponse to climate change. In 2006 all 32 Scottish local authorities signed Scotland’s Climate ChangeDeclarationvii committing them to action to reduce emissions and adapt to the unavoidable impacts ofclimate change. As part of the concordatviii between Scottish Government and local government, each localauthority will agree a Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) highlighting their contributions towards nationaloutcomes.


Meeting Emission Reduction Targets

To meet the ambitious targets proposed by the Scottish Climate Change Bill, new policies and deliverymechanisms will be needed. Central to this will be a system of cross-compliance - to ensure that spendingdecisions across government assess the carbon impact of policy options. Work is currently being undertakento map out the development of new policies to contribute to delivery of the Scottish Government’s 2011 and2050 targets. Internal policy expertise alongside independent advice from expert panels will inform measuresneeded to meet targets. One expert panel was established to recommend measures which will make housesand buildings in Scotland more energy eYcient towards a goal of zero-carbon buildings. They published TheSullivan report on a Low Carbon Buildings Strategy for Scotlandix, on 12 December 2007. The UK ClimateChange Bill also makes provision for Government to request advice from the UK Committee on ClimateChangex on any issue relating to the Bill or climate change more generally.

Scotland recognises the need to take advantage of and build on its particular strengths. Scotland’senormous natural resources present an opportunity for global leadership in harnessing renewable energy.The Scottish Government has set an ambitious target that 50% of Scotland’s electricity demand should bemet from renewable sources, and is committed to supporting a wide range of renewable technologiesincluding wave and tidal, on- and oV-shore wind, and hydrogen and fuel cell technology. The EuropeanMarine Energy Centre in Orkney provides testing facilities for the development of several full-scaleprototypes. Support schemes are in place to encourage the use of biomass energy and the uptake of small-scale renewables at householder and community levels. Activities to develop the market for renewable heatare also underway.

Land use is important in the Scottish context. A large area of rural land, organic-rich soils, agricultureand forestry contribute to emissions, but also have a role in removing around 8% of emissions through theircarbon sink function. To maximise this natural sequestration, the Scottish Rural Development Programmexi

encourages climate-friendly management practices and investment in woodlands. Additional measuresinclude addressing the environmental impacts of transport through a package of funded measures thatpromote more sustainable travel and the progression of plans to introduce a “one-stop-shop” for domesticconsumers across Scotland to provide a more strategic and co-ordinated approach to sustainable energyadvice.

Emissions Trading

Targeting emissions from large business and public sector organisations including local authorities,retailers and central government is a key component of Scotland’s action. While emissions trading is adevolved matter, the Scottish Government supported the creation of a single approach operating across theUK and worked with the UK Government to implement the EU Emissions Trading Schemexii (ETS) and isworking to develop proposals for the Carbon Reduction Commitmentxiii (CRC). A further consultation onregulations to implement the CRC will be held in the summer.

Adaptation

While urgent action to reduce emissions is vital so is action to reduce Scotland’s vulnerability to theimpacts of our already changing climate. Some degree of climate change remains unavoidable as the impactsover the next 30 to 40 years have been determined by past and present emissions. We cannot prevent thesebut we can adapt.

A new Scottish Adaptation Strategy—to be consulted on in 2008—will identify priority adaptation actionrequired in areas such as planning, health, flood risk management, transport, forestry, building standards,agriculture and nature conservation, and clarify roles and responsibilities in achieving this action. TheScottish Government is also working with UK partners on the development of a national UK AdaptationPolicy Frameworkxiv supporting joint action on adaptation challenges that do not recognise nationalborders. To help and encourage businesses and organisations, including local authorities, in thedevelopment of their own adaptation response, the Scottish Government has had a significant role in theestablishment of the Scottish Climate Change Impacts Partnershipxv.

Leadership

Through this activity, and with the target proposed in the Scottish Climate Change Bill amongst the mostambitious by any country, the Scottish Government believes Scotland can play a leading roleinternationally. Recognising the importance of strong leadership, Scotland was one of the first signatoriesto the 2005 Montreal Climate Change Declaration.xviThis Declaration committed states and regions to worktogether to tackle climate change and in November 2006, agreed the establishment of a climate changealliance with amongst others California, Quebec, Manitoba, Bavaria and South Australia.


The Scottish Government is also determined to show leadership by improving its environmentalperformance and reducing the environmental impacts of its own activities and operations. A Report ofEnvironmental Performancexvii records progress on annual targets for environmental improvement and anew Scottish Government Travel Planxviii presents a package of measures designed to encouraging moresustainable business and staV travel practices.

A commitment also already exists amongst many businesses operating in Scotland to address the climatechange challenge. The Scottish Government is keen to build on this through the Climate Change BusinessDelivery Groupxix encouraging businesses in Scotland to share best practice, identify opportunities andchallenge each other to do more.

In recognition of the increased level of eVort required within and outwith government to act on climatechange, resources have been announced for a range of sustainable development and climate changeinitiatives, including a new Climate Challenge Fund.

Conclusion

Ultimately addressing the urgent social, economic and environmental challenge of climate change willonly be successful if everyone of us accepts responsibility and acts sustainably. The Scottish Governmentis confident that government, business and all the people of Scotland are ready to rise to the challenge ofclimate change.

References

i Government Economic Strategy—www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/11/12115041/0ii Scottish Budget Spending Review 2007—www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/11/13092240/0iii Scottish Climate Change Bill Consultation—www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Climate-

Change/16327/Climate-Change-Billiv UK Climate Change Bill—www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/climatechange/uk/legislation/

index.htm

v Changing Our Ways, Scotland’s Climate Change Programme—www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/03/30091039/0

vi Scotland’s Climate Change Programme: Annual Report 2007 www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/03/08105454/0

vii Scotland’s Climate Change Declaration—www.sustainable-scotland.net/climatechange/viii Concordat between the Scottish Government and local government.—www.scotland.gov.uk/

Publications/2007/11/13092240/concordatix The Sullivan report on a Low Carbon Buildings Strategy for Scotland—www.sbsa.gov.uk/

sullivanreport.htmx UK Committee on Climate Change—www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/legislation/

committee/index.htmxi Scottish Rural Development Programme—www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Rural/SRDPxii EU Emissions Trading Scheme—http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Climate-Change/

16327/euets/Homexiii Carbon Reduction Commitment—www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Climate-Change/16327/

EnergyPerComm/Introsummxiv UK Adaptation Policy Framework—www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/adapt/

policyframe.htmxv Scottish Climate Change Impacts Partnership—www.sccip.org.ukxvi Montreal Climate Change Declaration—www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Climate-Change/

16327/Declarationxvii The 7th Annual Report of Environmental Performance of the Scottish Government—

www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/12/06160436/0xviii Scottish Government Travel Plan—www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/12/06160535/0xix Climate Change Business Delivery Group—www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2007/06/29110426

31 March 2008


Memorandum submitted by the Welsh Assembly Government

Introduction

1. The Welsh Assembly Government is the devolved Government for Wales and is responsible for mostof the day-to-day concerns for the people of Wales including the economy, environment, health, educationand local government.

2. The role of the Welsh Assembly Government is to exercise functions devolved to it in order to makedecisions on matters that aVect people’s daily lives, develop and implement policy, make subordinatelegislation (eg regulations and statutory guidance) and propose Assembly Measures.

3. Under the Government of Wales Act 2006,74 the Welsh Assembly Government has powers conferredto Welsh Ministers to do anything which they consider appropriate to achieve the promotion orimprovement of the economic, social and environmental well-being of Wales. They also have legislativecompetence based on “matters” specified in Schedule 5 of the Act. In order for a “matter” to be specifiedin that Schedule, it must relate to one of the broad subjects areas or “fields” listed in that Schedule.

Assembly Government Policy on Climate Change

4. Climate change is one of the biggest challenges facing the world today and the Welsh AssemblyGovernment is determined to play its part in tackling it.

5. “One Wales”,75 the agenda for government in Wales, sets out the Assembly Government’s ambitionsin relation to tackling climate change in Wales and includes a commitment to “aim to achieve annual carbonreduction-equivalent emission reductions of 3% per year by 2011 in areas of devolved competence”.

6. We are not taking a legalistic interpretation of “areas of devolved competence”; instead we will bedefining broad areas where we can achieve reductions. This will pick up the sectors identified in One Wales(residential, transport and public sector) and other key sectors where the Assembly Government has realopportunities to support emission reduction action.

7. A number of steps have already been taken across all policy areas to reduce the greenhouse gasemissions that cause climate change and to adapt to the impacts of unavoidable climate change.

Emissions in Wales

8. The latest figures, for 2005,76 show that greenhouse gas emissions as a whole and carbon dioxideemissions in Wales remain below the 1990 benchmark. In 2005 there was a 9% decrease in emissions of thebasket of six greenhouse gases compared with base year emissions and a 4% decrease in emissions of CO2compared to base year emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions are subject to annual variation.

Climate Change Commission for Wales

9. The Climate Change Commission for Wales77 will provide the key forum for action on ClimateChange in Wales. The Commission will provide leadership for action in every sector, help build a consensuson the response to climate change and inform the policies of the Welsh Assembly Government. It includesrepresentatives of all four main political parties, representatives from businesses, the voluntary sector andlocal government and other expert bodies with an interest in climate change.

10. The Commission is supported by four subgroups which have the expertise to look at individual issuesin depth and to feed into the Commission and wider policy development. These groups contain a muchbroader range of stakeholders and carry out detailed development work. The subgroups cover: adaptation;baseline, methodology and economics, communications and emission reductions.

11. The Commission has met twice to date and the opportunity of annual meetings with the UKCommittee on Climate Change is being explored; in order to allow the two groups to share knowledge andto inform Climate Change policies in Wales.

74 Government of Wales Act (2006)— http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga 20060032 en 175 One Wales: A progressive agenda for the Government of Wales—http://wales.gov.uk/about/strategy/strategypublications/

strategypubs/onewales/?lang%en76 Green House Gas Inventory Report.77 Climate Change Commission for Wales—http://new.wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/climate change/

whatarewedoing/commission/?lang%en


The UK Climate Change Bill

12. The Welsh Assembly Government is working in partnership with the UK Government and the otherDevolved Administrations on the UK Climate Change Bill,78 which will set a statutory target for the UKas a whole to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by at least 60% by 2050.

13. As well as setting clear targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the Bill also establishes a newsystem of legally binding five year “carbon budgets”, set at least 15 years ahead, to provide a clear pathwayfor emission reduction and establishes a new expert body, the Committee on Climate Change; to provideadvice to the UK Government and the Devolved Administrations.

14. Within the Bill are a number of provisions in relation to Wales, including:

— a clause requiring the Welsh Ministers to lay before the Assembly a report on their objectives,actions and priorities in relation to greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of climate change inWales; and

— an amendment to the Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006 which has the eVect oftransferring to Welsh Ministers the responsibility for publishing guidance for local authorities inWales on climate change.

15. The Welsh Ministers are also given powers to make trading schemes in relation to matters that, in thefuture, come within the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales and also in relation tothe limitation of activities which consist of the emissions of greenhouse gases. They are also given an expresspower to allow the purchase oVset credits.

16. A UK Government amendment placed new powers on Welsh Ministers in relation to climate changeadaptation, specifically to:

— produce guidance for public bodies on adapting to the impacts of climate change; and

— require public bodies to produce a report on an assessment of the current and predicted impactsof climate change in relation to the authority’s function, a statement of the authority’s proposalsand policies for adapting to climate change in the exercise of its functions and an assessment ofthe progress made by the authority towards implementing the proposals and policies set out in itsprevious reports.

17. These new powers will enable the Assembly Government to provide improved support to publicauthorities on climate change adaptation and provide a mechanism to require action if a public body is nottaking proper account of the action needed. This is further supported by a clause requiring Welsh Ministersto lay before the National Assembly for Wales a reports that state how these powers will be used and whichof the reporting authorities will be covered.

18. The Assembly Government and the other devolved administrations have a key role to play when theSecretary of State sets the carbon budget and in reviewing targets. The Bill ensures that the devolvedadministrations will have three months to feed in their comments and that the Secretary of State mustpublish a statement that sets out whether, and how, s/he has taken account of the devolvedadministrations’ views.

Committee on Climate Change

19. The Assembly Government, alongside the UK Government and other devolved administrations willappoint, fund and sponsor the Committee on Climate Change.79

20. The Committee will review the targets contained within the Bill, advise on the setting of the carbonbudgets and advise the UK Government and Devolved Administrations on the inclusion of other GreenHouse Gases and the inclusion of other sectors (for example international aviation and shipping). TheCommittee will also provide expert independent advice to the Devolved Administrations on their non-statutory targets.

21. The Welsh Assembly Government intends to use the expert analytical expertise of the Committee toadvise on the optimum way to achieve the 3% target set out in One Wales.

22. A concordat is being drawn up between the National Governments to establish how the processes setout in the Bill will work in practice and to define the relationship between the Committee, the UKGovernment and the Devolved Administrations.

78 Climate Change Bill—http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldbills/029/08029.i-iv.html79 Committee on Climate Change—http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/legislation/committee/index.htm


Working with the UK Government on Climate Change Policy and European Issues

23. The Assembly Government works closely with the UK Government on the development of climatechange policy. The current UK Climate Change Programme was developed with the devolvedadministrations. There is a separate chapter in relation to the Assembly Government’s policies.

24. Assembly Government oYcials are members of a wide range of working groups involved in climatechange policy development and implementation.

25. UK Government Ministers regularly write to seek the views of Assembly Government on proposedpolicies or to agree the negotiating position for European proposals.

26. Key areas of joint working include the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the development of theCarbon Reduction Commitment.

Climate Change Communication and Engagement

27. We will be launching a major communications campaign on climate change in the summer and willbe seeking to maximise links with other organisations that are communicating on this issue. The AssemblyGovernment is also taking a number of other actions to raise awareness of climate change for example theappointment of six young people as climate change champions and the development of a Welsh carboncalculator.

28. A series of community engagement events are being held across Wales drawing together communitygroups to share experience, network and to tell us what support they wanted from the AssemblyGovernment. These events will inform the longer term development of resources and support forcommunity groups.

29. We are already preparing some resources:

— In partnership with Cynnal Cymru, commissioned a DVD to showcase case studies of realcommunities taking action to become more sustainable to inspire others.

— Developing a community information and resource pack, which the DVD will form part of.

— Developing, advised by an external steering group, an Advice Note on Climate Change to supportthe statutory guidance on Community Strategies.

Young People

30. We appointed six climate change champions following a competition last year. The climate changechampions’ role is to let people know the simple steps they can take to reduce their carbon footprint andthey are taking part in a mix of local, national and international events. Each champion has a column intheir local newspaper and several are working with local schools.

31. Although the Welsh and English champions were selected through separate competitions, we didliaise closely with Defra and the champions took part in a joint fact finding expedition to the Netherlands.

32. We support the Eco Schools programme in Wales and have set an aim that all schools should be EcoSchools and be moving towards attaining green flag status. We have also developed an Education forSustainable Development and Global Citizenship curriculum and are rolling this out throughout educationand learning.

33. We issued a Climate Change resource pack to schools last year and we are now developing an updateto the pack based on the new curriculum.

Emission Reduction Actions

34. Work is underway to develop the programme of action to deliver our 3% emission reduction, but awide range of activity is already in hand.

35. On energy advice, the Assembly Government provides over £4.4 million funding to the Carbon Trustin Wales, which provides advice to businesses in Wales. We have also supported the Energy Saving Trustto enable it to bring forward the rollout of its enhanced Energy Advice Centres in Wales, which oVer adviceand support on energy eYciency, microgeneration and transport.

36. The Assembly Government provides grant funding to improve the energy eYciency of over 10,000vulnerable households in Wales each year under the Home Energy EYciency Scheme (HEES). EnergyeYciency measures available under HEES include heating and insulation work.

37. The recent publication of the “Renewable Energy Route Map for Wales” begins consultation on wayforward to a leaner, greener and cleaner Wales. The consultation sets out proposals for moving Walestowards self-suYciency in renewable electricity generation whilst at the same time driving towards energyeYciency and the provision of heating requirements from renewable sources.


38. This reflects the view that, within 20 years, Wales can be self suYcient in renewable electricity as wellas showing leadership in achieving major energy eYciency improvements and producing low carbon energyfrom sustainable biomass.

39. We will be developing a National Energy EYciency and Saving Plan during 2008, which will addressclimate change and fuel poverty issues and fulfil another One Wales commitment.

40. One Wales contains a commitment to develop a Green Jobs Strategy. This will provide a new strategiccontext for our support to enable businesses in addressing climate change and taking the businessopportunities presented.

41. Public sector procurement also has an important role to play and Value Wales has been active inpromoting sustainable procurement across the public sector in Wales.

42. We are committed to ensuring that new buildings in Wales are more sustainable. We have set out ouraspiration that all new buildings constructed in Wales from 2011 onwards to be zero carbon. We arepursuing devolution of the Building Regulations to help us move this forward and will consult further withstakeholders.

43. Already expect new buildings that the Assembly Government influences through funding, investmentor land disposal to achieve BREEAM “Excellent” and for key projects that we influence to be masterplanned on the basis of low/zero carbon. We are looking to improve on this, year on year, in the run upto 2011.

44. We have asked the Sustainable Development Commission to bring together key organisations todrive towards achieving this aspiration and making improvements in existing buildings.

45. The Assembly Government is committed to setting an example through the management of its ownbusiness and estate and has commissioned a comprehensive review of the administrative estate which willmake recommendations on options for driving down the carbon footprint of our buildings and oYcialtravel.

46. The planning system has an important role to play in tackling climate change. This is alreadyhighlighted in Planning Policy Wales80 and its associated Technical Advice Notes, but we are currentlyconsidering the results of the consultation Planning for Climate Change to update Planning Policy Wales andprovide other guidance and support.

47. Tackling climate change is at the heart of the forthcoming Wales Transport Strategy. The Strategyadopts an outcome-based approach in order to maximise the contribution of transport right across theeconomic, social and environmental agenda. It will be implemented through a National Transport Plan,setting out detailed policies and programmes over diVerent timeframes, as well as Regional Transport Plansprepared by the regional transport consortia.

48. The general approach in the Strategy is to encourage travel by less carbon-intensive modes and toimprove the carbon-eYciency of all modes. In the short-term, cost-eVective savings are likely to come frompolicies focused on securing behavioural change. This includes a range of policies to make publictransport—both bus and rail—more attractive and to encourage a switch from the private car. In addition,a range of measures are being taken forward under the banner of “Smarter Choices”, with greater use ofworkplace and school travel planning, car sharing schemes and enhanced provision for walking and cycling.

49. A Sustainable Travel Towns initiative is being developed, to enable a number of towns to becomeexemplars in terms of sustainable travel. This approach will then be rolled-out across Wales.

50. We work closely with the UK Government on addressing transport emissions because many of thekey policy levers lie with the UK Government, European Union, or may even require broader internationalagreement. These non-devolved issues include: the development of market mechanisms, including fiscalmeasures such as fuel duty and Vehicle Excise Duty; regulatory measures, such as the introduction of theRenewable Transport Fuels Obligation (which will require transport fuel suppliers to ensure that aproportion of their sales are from renewable sources) and legislation on new car fuel eYciency.

51. The Assembly Government and all local authorities in Wales signed the Welsh Declaration onClimate Change and Energy EYciency.81 The purpose of the declaration is to demonstrate a commitmentby individual authorities to tackle greenhouse gas emissions and lead onto the development of longer term,local strategies in support of the UK Government and the Devolved Administrations’ Climate ChangeProgramme.

52. Under the recent round of Policy Agreements with local authorities we have seen a doubling ofprogress on improving domestic energy eYciency.

53. A new model of local strategic leadership across sectors is being developed, which will enhance thecapacity to tackle cross-cutting strategic issues like climate change-including through sharing expertise andidentifying opportunities for radical change in the way services are delivered.

80 Planning Policy Wales and Technical Advice Notes—http://new.wales.gov.uk/topics/planning/policy/?lang%en81 Declaration on Climate Change—http://www.wlga.gov.uk/english/meeting-documents/a-welsh-declaration-on-climate-

change/


54. A number of Local Service Boards have identified climate change as a topic for their pilots. Werecently hosted a meeting to bring these authorities, and others with an interest, together to share theirexperiences on this issue.

Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change

55. The Welsh Assembly Government is committed to taking action on the impacts of climate changeand we are developing a programme of action on adaptation which will sit alongside our emissionreduction actions.

56. There is an Adaptation sub-group under the Climate Change Commission. They have identified anumber of key topics on which to prepare brief scoping reports, which will inform their longer term workprogramme.

57. Additional powers on adapting to climate change have been secured through the Climate Change Bill.These will enable the Assembly Government to provide further support to public bodies in addressingthis issue.

58. The previous administration consulted on an action plan to adapt to climate change Responding toour Changing Climate. The consultation closed on 27 April 2007. A report on the results of the consultationis on the Assembly Government website. A clear message from the consultation was the need to ensureaction on adaptation, and action on emission reduction. This was integrated and we are therefore developinga comprehensive programme on climate action.

59. Action is already being taken to adapt to the impacts of climate change, for example:

— Through the New Approaches Programme we are moving to a risk management approach forflooding and developing a wider toolkit of flood risk management measures.

— Through Planning Policy Wales and its supporting Technical Advice Notes, we are ensuring thatplanning system assists in minimising flood risk, managing the thermal performance of buildingsand other building design issues that will be impacted on by a changing climate.

— We are co-funders of the MONARCH project studying the impacts of climate change onbiodiversity, and we are also partners in the Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership.

Conclusion

60. Addressing the challenge of climate change will require action by everyone—from individuals tocommunities, from organisations and businesses, from local government to national and internationalaction. In Wales, we have the opportunity to lead amongst small nations and we plan to do so by takingprompt action to play our part in achieving the necessary emission reductions.

61. It is important that the UK works together in order to ensure coordinated action on climate change.This is due to its nature as a global issue and also due to the nature of the devolution settlements and crossboarder issues (such as rivers) meaning that no one administration can take eVective action on its own.

5 April 2008

Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery OYce Limited7/2008 398317 19585