Women In The Board Room

The Parliamentary Yearbook has been following closely the Government’s drive to increase the proportion of women in British boardrooms and will be publishing the results in the next edition

In February this year David Cameron warned that the lack of women in Britain's boardrooms is holding back the country's economic recovery. The Prime Minister said there was clear evidence to signal that ending Britain's male-dominated business culture would improve economic performance.

In 2010, 27% of board-level appointments at FTSE 100 companies went to female applicants, but one in ten of Britain's biggest firms at that time still had all-male boards.

A Government-commissioned report last year said quotas should be imposed unless top firms acted to increase the number of women on their boards to at least one in four by 2015.

Today however Business Secretary Vince Cable announced that new official statistics show that the number of women in the boardrooms of the UK’s top companies has increased in the past year.

This week sees the first year anniversary of the voluntary code of conduct for executive search firms.

The code, developed by leading members of the industry in direct response to Lord Davies’ review into ‘Women on Boards’, sets out seven key principles of best practice for executive search firms to abide by throughout the recruitment process.

Since Lord Davies’ review and subsequent report, the number of women appointed to the boards of the UK’s top companies has reached unprecedented levels, with women now making up 16.7% of FTSE 100, and 10.9% of FTSE 250 boards, up from 12.5% and 7.8% respectively in 2010.

Secretary of State for Business, Vince Cable, said:

“The progress we have seen in the past year proves that the UK’s business-led approach to achieving boardroom diversity is working. The Voluntary Code of Conduct has played a key part in this progress.

“Diverse boards are better boards: benefiting from fresh perspectives, talent, new ideas and broader experience which enables businesses to better reflect and respond to the needs of their customers.

“This is good for women, good for companies who need to be the best they can be in order to compete in today’s tough global market place, and ultimately good for the UK economy as a whole. It is essential that Executive Search Firms and Chairmen continue to use the Code to increase this rate of change”.

Lord Davies said:

"I am very pleased to see the progress that has been made over the past year since the Code of Conduct was launched.

“I welcome the continued efforts and collaborations of Executive Search Firms and business groups to ensure that we see a sustainable and consistent change and that talent is recognised regardless of gender.”

Since March of this year women have made up 44% of newly appointed FTSE 100 board directors and 40% of those in the FTSE 250. The Executive Search Firms Code of Conduct, which requires 30% female long-lists and encourages firms to expand their traditional search avenues, has been welcomed by Executive Search Firms, Chairs and Candidates.

Over the last year Executive Search Firms have seen a continued culture shift amongst their clients, who are increasingly open to considering a wider range of female candidates and are placing a strong priority on appointing qualified women.

To date 34 leading Executive Search Firms have signed up to the code.

The Government's economic policy objective is to achieve 'strong, sustainable and balanced growth that is more evenly shared across the country and between industries.' It set four ambitions in the ‘Plan for Growth’ published at Budget 2011:

• To create the most competitive tax system in the G20
• To make the UK the best place in Europe to start, finance and grow a business
• To encourage investment and exports as a route to a more balanced economy
• To create a more educated workforce that is the most flexible in Europe.

Work is underway across Government to achieve these ambitions, including progress on more than 250 measures as part of the Growth Review. Developing an Industrial Strategy gives new impetus to this work by providing businesses, investors and the public with more clarity about the long-term direction in which the Government wants the economy to travel.

The Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on the progress of the measures as we go through the months ahead.

‘Make It In Great Britain’ — Transforming The Uk’s Manufacturing Sector

The Parliamentary Yearbook is monitoring progress on the coalition government’s proposals to drive a sustained manufacturing revival. Since July 2011, a number of initiatives with associated funding have been implemented. 

On the 25 October last year, the government called upon Britain’s business community to champion UK manufacturing. The campaign, ‘Make it in Great Britain’ is part of the government’s programme to encourage long-term economic growth, the emphasis being on establishing a strong manufacturing base for a balanced and sustainable UK economy.

The culmination of the campaign is a new exhibition opened today and planned to coincide with the Olympic Games period. The exhibition is designed to celebrate the success of UK manufacturing and promote the sector as a career path for young people. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, has asked manufacturers across the country to help find up to 30 industry champions to support the campaign.

The exhibition will feature a mix of displays from 39 businesses of all sizes including iconic names like McLaren, Mars, BAE and Rolls Royce. The campaign was launched last year to change outdated perceptions of manufacturing, including dispelling the myth that the UK ‘doesn’t make anything anymore’.

Business Secretary Vince Cable said:

“Generating £137bn each year and employing 2.5 million people, manufacturing is a vital part of the UK’s economy. Perceptions of the industry are outdated and need to change if we are going to attract the talent needed to support manufacturing in the long term. Both Government and industry have a role to play, which is why we launched the Make it in Great Britain campaign and are hosting this exhibition.”

The Business Secretary joined Business Minister Mark Prisk to launch the ‘Make it in Great Britain’ Exhibition, which is taking place for six weeks during the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Business Minister Mark Prisk said:

“I’m delighted to launch this exhibition, as it will showcase some of the exciting great innovations of today. We have a mixture of iconic names, but also small and medium sized businesses like Elfab and Ultra Global that are leaders in their field, and have come together to show the public what modern manufacturing is all about.

“There is a range of rewarding career opportunities available, requiring advanced skills and expertise. I would encourage people to come along to the exhibition and see first hand what manufacturing can offer them.”

Ian Blatchford, Director of the Science Museum said:

“The Science Museum and its world leading collections demonstrate some of the greatest engineering achievements of the last 200 years, and the ‘Make it in Great Britain’ exhibition is no exception, highlighting the exciting places that UK manufacturing could take us in the next few years and beyond.

“Science, technology and engineering have all been used to solve problems throughout history – from light-bulbs and televisions to inventions such as the Stephenson’s Rocket locomotive on show at the museum, and they’ve all gone on to contribute to British manufacturing. We’re hoping that as many people as possible will come and experience some of the most exciting innovations from around the UK this summer at the Science Museum.”

Showcasing alongside the businesses are the finalists of the Make it in Great Britain Challenge – a competition to seek out the next big pre-market products or ideas from across the UK.

These include a new technology which could offer relief to tinnitus sufferers and an eco-friendly alternative to everyday cement that could reduce CO₂ emissions by up to 90 per cent.

As part of the Challenge, all finalists of the Make it…Breakthrough category were put to a public vote ahead of the exhibition for the chance to be crowned the ‘People’s Choice’.

The winner has today been named as Bedflex, which is a device designed by a group of BAE Systems apprentices to assist the recovery of amputees and critical care patients by allowing them to take part in bed-based exercises.

Throughout the exhibition the public will vote on what finalists they want to win across all five categories. The winners from each category will go on display together during the final week of the exhibition. An overall competition winner will then be chosen.

Entry is free to the ‘Make it in Great Britain’ Exhibition. It will be on display until 09 September 2012.
Further news, as policy develops, will be covered by the Parliamentary Year book and there will be a major feature on the topic in the next edition

Solar Energy Feed-In Tariffs

Earlier this year the Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook reported on the Government’s plans for detailed consultations with industry and consumers over the planned changes to the feed-in tariff scheme for solar energy. This will form part of a major feature on environment, sustainable energy and climate change in the next edition

October 2008 Feed-in tariffs in the United Kingdom were first announced in October 2008 by Ed Miliband, then Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. He presented details of the scheme, which began in early April 2010.

March 2011 The coalition government announced that support for large-scale photovoltaic installations (greater than 50 KW) would be cut. This was in response to European speculators lining up to establish huge solar farms in the West Country, which would have absorbed disproportionate amounts of the fund.

June 2011 The Department for Energy and Climate Change confirmed that Feed-in Tariffs would be cut for solar PV systems above 50 KW after 1st Aug, 2011. Many were disappointed with the decision of DECC, especially after long term consultations. In October 2011 DECC announced dramatic cuts of around 55% to feed in tariff rates, with additional reductions for community or group schemes. The cuts were to be effective from 12 December 2011, with a consultation exercise to end on 23 December 2011. This was successfully challenged in the high court by an application for judicial review, jointly made by the environmental pressure group Friends of the Earth (FoE) and two solar companies - Solarcentury and HomeSun. The judgment, made by Mr Justice Mitting after a two-day court hearing, was hailed as a major victory by green campaigners and the solar industry.

DECC is introducing regulations today to put the Feed-in Tariffs (FITs) scheme on a more predictable, certain and sustainable footing for householders, businesses and the solar industry.

May 2012 The Government announced the introduction of a range of changes to the FITs scheme with effect from 1 August to provide better value for money and allow businesses and householders to plan with confidence. The tariff for a small domestic solar installation will be 16p per kilowatt hour, down from 21p, and will be set to decrease on a 3 month basis thereafter, with pauses if the market slows down. All tariffs will continue to be index-linked in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI) and the export tariff will be increased from 3.2p to 4.5p. The new tariffs were calculated to give a return on investment (ROIs) of over 6% for most typical, well-sited installations, and up to 8% for the larger bands.

Today The final package of changes to the FITs scheme has been announced by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), following consultation in February this year. This is part of the comprehensive review designed to ensure value for money for the consumer and long term certainty for those who choose to invest.

The changes will affect tariffs for all newly eligible FITs technologies from 1 December 2012 onwards.
Changes to solar tariffs, which have already been announced, will take place from 1 August 2012.

A degression mechanism will be introduced for Anaerobic Digestion (AD), wind and hydro from April 2014 in line with uptake of these technologies. Tariffs will be published two months before the degression date and will be based on publicly-available data. Decisions on the degression mechanism for solar were outlined in the Government response published on 24 May 2012.

Energy and Climate Change Minister Greg Barker said:

“I want to provide long term certainty for those choosing to invest in all forms of small scale green electricity generation, not just solar, and our changes to FITs will do just that.

“As well reducing tariffs over time for AD, hydro and small scale wind in line with uptake, we are introducing tariff guarantees for all technologies, great news for projects with long lead in times like hydro power.

“We are also planning to remove the energy efficiency requirement for community and school solar projects in recognition of the hard to treat nature of community buildings often involved in such schemes, and the educational benefits that they can bring. These types of projects will also be able to get tariff guarantees for installations of any size, making it easier for communities to get involved in clean green local energy generation.”

Dave Sowden, Chief Executive of the Micropower Council said:

“We welcome what is broadly a very positive set of proposals that should bring greater confidence to investors and customers. In particular the decision to increase the export tariff, the clarification of cost controls for microCHP, the community proposals and the decision not to extend energy efficiency requirements beyond PV are welcome developments.

“We will continue to monitor progress of the technologies supported by FITs with a view to maintaining constructive dialogue with DECC to inform further developments to the scheme.”

Paul Thompson, Head of Policy at the Renewable Energy Association said:

“These decisions demonstrate that DECC has listened carefully to industry concerns, and should restore certainty to the sub-5MW sector. We particularly welcome the support for community schemes and the improvements to the cost control mechanism. The introduction of tariff guarantees for projects at a relatively early stage is also very helpful, and we look forward to a similar approach being extended to the Renewable Heat Incentive.”

DECC is introducing a system of preliminary accreditation so all AD and hydro installations and larger wind and PV installations (over 50 kW) will be able to know before construction that they will be accredited. It will also provide certainty over tariffs for six months to two years depending on the technology. This means that if a developer gets their project up and running within the tariff guarantee timescale, they will get the tariff that applied at the time they applied for preliminary accreditation.

A system of advance tariff guarantees will also be available to non-domestic community energy PV projects up to 50 kW. A new hydro band for 100-500kW installations will also be introduced to ensure developers are incentivised to design their project at the most appropriate size.

“Community” FITs projects will be defined on the basis of existing tax law and community schemes will be exempt from the energy efficiency requirement (level D) introduced for solar from 1st April this year. Schools will also be exempt from the energy efficiency requirement even where they do not meet the definition of community scheme. Changes will take effect from 1 December, subject to Parliamentary and state aid clearance.

Renewable Heat Incentive

DECC has also today set out proposals to improve the performance and manage the future budget of the non-domestic Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) scheme, providing greater certainty to the market.

To ensure the RHI budget is managed effectively, DECC is proposing to introduce a flexible degression based system. Under this system tariffs would be reduced for new applicants if uptake approaches pre-determined trigger points. Tests to see whether degression is needed would take place quarterly, and if a tariff reduction is needed, one month’s notice would be given. Progress towards the trigger points for each technology and the scheme overall would be monitored throughout the year and data published monthly.

Energy and Climate Change Minister Greg Barker said:

“The Coalition is fully committed to driving forward investment in renewable heat, and our proposals will make sure we provide the right support for the industry.

“We want to continue helping renewable heat to grow and flourish, providing long term certainty for those who choose to invest in it.”

DECC has set out plans to introduce greater environmental sustainability into the RHI through the inclusion of standards on Biomass sustainability (in line with the UK Bioenergy strategy published in April 2012) and a clear process for how the air quality regime will work. DECC is also looking to simplify the metering arrangements for the RHI, reducing the administrative burden on participants and taking views on the scheme from existing applicants into account.

DECC will continue to assess the workings of the RHI scheme and is proposing to review the scheme in 2014 to ensure tariffs for new applicants are still providing value for money.

We shall be adding to the article as there are further developments and any changes to the plans will be reflected in the content. The full report will be published in print and online in the next edition of the Parliamentary Year book.

Mps Report Says Health Impact Of Alcohol Misuse “Insidious And Pervasive

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook has been monitoring progress in Government policy relating to alcohol misuse for major features on the topic in the next edition of the publication

Today the House of Commons Health Select Committee published its report on the Government’s Alcohol Strategy.

Figures today show an ever-growing cost of alcohol to the NHS which currently stands at £2.7bn a year, including £1bn on accident and emergency services. £2.7bn equates to £90 for every taxpayer in the country. This is part of a wider cost to society from alcohol of between £17 billion and £22 billion per annum. In 2010/11 alone there were 200,000 hospital admissions with a primary alcohol-related diagnosis, 40 per cent higher than in 2002/03. The number of patients admitted with acute intoxification has more than doubled to 18,500 since 2002/03.

The Prime Minister said earlier in the year:

“Every night, in town centres, hospitals and police stations across the country, people have to cope with the consequences of alcohol abuse. And the problem is getting worse. Over the last decade we’ve seen a frightening growth in the number of people – many under-age – who think it’s acceptable for people to get drunk in public in ways that wreck lives, spread fear and increase crime.

“This is one of the scandals of our society and I am determined to deal with it. As figures today show the NHS is having to pick up an ever-growing bill – £2.7bn a year, including £1bn on accident and emergency services alone. That’s money we have to spend because of the reckless behaviour of an irresponsible minority.

“Across the country local hospitals, ambulance crews and the police are rising to the challenge. We must help them to do so and will be setting out how through the forthcoming Alcohol Strategy. Whether it’s the police officers in A&E that have been deployed in some hospitals, the booze buses in Soho and Norwich, or the Drunk Tanks used abroad, we need innovative solutions to confront the rising tide of unacceptable behaviour.”

The Government’s alcohol strategy sets out proposals to crack down on the 'binge drinking' culture in our country; cut the alcohol-fuelled violence and disorder that blights too many of our communities; and slash the number of people drinking to damaging levels.

The strategy includes commitments to:

• introduce a minimum unit price for alcohol
• consult on a ban on the sale of multi-buy alcohol discounting
• introduce stronger powers for local areas to control the density of licensed premises including making the impact on health a consideration for this
• pilot innovative sobriety schemes to challenge alcohol-related offending

In addition, the coalition government's programme on alcohol includes commitments to:

• overhaul the Licensing Act to give local authorities and the police much stronger powers to remove licences from, or refuse to grant licences to premises that are causing problems
• allow councils and the police to permanently shut down any shop or bar that is repeatedly selling alcohol to children
• double the maximum fine for those caught selling alcohol to minors to £20,000
• These measures will come into force on 25th April 2012. Later this year we will introduce powers to:
• allow local councils to charge more for late-night licences, which will help pay for additional policing
• give local areas the power to stop alcohol sales late at night if they are causing problems by restricting operating and closing hours

MPs on the Health Committee warn in their new report that, whilst the Government's Alcohol Strategy is a welcome attempt to address the problems alcohol causes in a coherent way, its focus on public order overshadows health issues.

Launching the Committee's Government's Alcohol Strategy report, the Chair, Rt Hon Stephen Dorrell MP, said:

"The main focus of the strategy is binge drinking and its consequences for anti-social behaviour and public disorder. Those are important issues, but the health impact of chronic alcohol misuse is in our view also significant and greater emphasis needs to be placed on addressing that impact.

“The Strategy contains a series of outcomes the Government wishes to bring about but does not define success.We believe that in order to be effective the Strategy needs some clearer objectives to provide a framework for both policy judgements and accountability.

“We recommend that Public Health England should have a central role in developing these objectives, and linking them to local strategies in every area across the country."

On the question of a minimum unit price for alcohol, Stephen Dorrell said:

"The Committee supports the decision to introduce a minimum unit price for alcohol , but the Government needs to recognise that setting the price is not a one-off event. A transparent process must be put in place in order to ensure that the price level is evidence-based and is monitored over time to assess its effectiveness.

“We also recommend that there should be a 'sunset clause' on the implementation of a minimum price so that it only remains in place if it is shown to be effective in reducing harmful drinking."

The Committee also concludes that:

• The Responsibility Deal is intrinsic to responsible corporate citizenship, but it is not a substitute for Government policy
• The alcohol industry needs to acknowledge that its advertising messages do have an effect on attitudes to alcohol and on consumption if it wishes to be seen as a serious committed partner in the Responsibility
• Rules on the advertising of alcohol should be re-examined to reduce the likelihood of adverts being seen by or directed at young people under 18
• Public Health England should undertake an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Responsibility Deal. It should also commission a study into the principles and implications of introducing the French Loi Evin
• The Department of Health's work on which models of treatment provision are most effective in addressing the health issues caused by alcohol abuse is welcome. The evidence the Committee received is that the establishment of Alcohol Specialist Nurse services throughout the country is one of those models.

"Striking the right balance on alcohol consumption is not straight forward. Most people enjoy alcohol without evidence of significant harm to their health, yet it is not possible to define what is a generally safe level of consumption as alcohol affects different people in different ways. Individuals who drink alcohol and the companies which sell it have an obligation to do so in a way which respects the rights and interests of their fellow citizens," adds Stephen Dorrell.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on Government action to curb alcohol misuse over the months ahead.

Growth Boosting Railway Upgrade

Recently the Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook has been reporting on the Government’s plans for railway upgrades including plans for High Speed 2. Improvements to our transport infrastructure will form part of a major feature in the next edition of the publication

More than £9 billion of growth-boosting railway upgrades across England and Wales – representing faster journey times, more reliable services and capacity for 140,000 extra daily commutes by train – have been announced by Transport Secretary Justine Greening.

The full £9.4bn programme of improvements to the rail network published yesterday will meet the needs of intercity passengers, commuters and freight up to the end of this decade while the Government continues to work on High Speed 2 to deliver rail capacity for the British economy in the decades to come.

This “High Level Output Specification” programme for 2014-2019 will be discussed at today’s meeting of the Cabinet which the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister will hold outside London.

Crossrail, Thameslink, and electrification between London and Cardiff, Manchester to Liverpool and Preston, and across the Pennines, are among £5.2bn of projects already committed to during 2014-2019. New schemes totalling £4.2bn unveiled today include:

• Upgrades to stations and tracks creating enough capacity around cities for an additional 140,000 daily rail commutes at peak times. In addition to Crossrail and Thameslink, announced previously, today’s enhancements – such as the £350m lengthening of platforms at London Waterloo station – will provide capacity for 120,000 more daily commutes in and out of London and 20,100 extra daily commutes across Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester and other cities.
• Faster journeys and more train capacity from £240m of improvements along the East Coast Main Line from the North East down through Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire to London.
• The creation of a high-capacity “electric spine” running from Yorkshire and the West Midlands to South Coast ports allowing more reliable electric trains to cut journey times and boost capacity for passengers and freight. This comprises: an £800m electrification and upgrade from Sheffield – through Nottingham, Derby and Leicester – to Bedford, completing the full electrification of the Midland Main Line out of London St Pancras; and electrification of the lines from Nuneaton and Bedford to Oxford, Reading, Basingstoke and Southampton.
• The landmark decision to take electric rail beyond Cardiff to Swansea, completing the full electrification of the Great Western Main Line out of London Paddington at a total cost of more than £600m, and electrifying the Welsh Valley lines, including Ebbw Vale, Maesteg and the Vale of Glamorgan. These will give two-thirds of the Welsh population access to new fleets of electric trains helping to generate Welsh jobs and growth by slashing journey times and boosting passenger and freight capacity.
• Completion in full of the “Northern Hub” cluster of rail enhancements with the approval of £322m of outstanding track and capacity upgrades across Manchester city centre, Manchester Airport and across to Liverpool. These are in addition to £477m of Northern Hub schemes already approved across the North of England such as electrification of the North Trans Pennine route between York and Manchester.
• A new £500m rail link between the Great Western Main Line and Heathrow allowing direct services to the airport for passengers from the West Country, the Thames Valley and Wales.

The HLOS package will be funded in part from fare rises already announced in 2010 and also from the substantial efficiency savings which projects like electrification will have on the long term operating costs of the railways.

Transport Secretary Justine Greening said:

“Investment on this scale, in every region of the country, shows how this coalition government is focused on delivering an affordable, reliable and faster railway network that drives jobs and growth.

“These plans to increase capacity and shorten journey times on intercity, commuter and freight services are, alongside our plans for high speed rail, absolutely key to securing our country’s prosperity in the decades ahead.”

The investment was also applauded by the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Prime Minister David Cameron said:

”From Crossrail, high speed rail and now the billions of pounds of investment we are announcing today, this government is committed to taking the long term decisions to deliver growth and jobs.

“In what is the biggest modernisation of our railways since the Victorian era this investment will mean faster journeys, more seats, better access to stations, greater freight links and a truly world class rail network.”

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg added:

”This is the biggest expansion in railways in over 150 years, with more than £9bn of investment across the country.

“Whilst we inherited a deficit greater than any in our nation’s peacetime history, we knew that we had to give the country the boost it needs, to build great railways and make journeys better for the millions of hard working people who use the train every day.

“The ‘Electric Spine’ will make a significant difference for passengers linking London, the Midlands and Yorkshire in a much more efficient rail line, connecting the South and North more effectively than ever before.

“As someone who cares deeply about the environment, the opportunity to dramatically expand rail, a greener form of transport than aviation or road is very exciting indeed. This investment will help people to choose trains over cars, reduce carbon emissions and provide a rail system that is faster, more reliable and greener.”

And Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne said:

“I am pleased that the Northern Hub will be funded in full as part of the Government’s plans, which is a significant boost for the major towns and cities of the North, helping to rebalance the UK economy and enabling growth and regeneration throughout the regions.

“This Government is making more funds available to invest in rail projects than at any time since the Victorian era, and shows that the Government is committed to delivering on its promises to support investment in public infrastructure that will support economic growth.”

We shall be adding to the article as there are further developments and any changes to the plans will be reflected in the content. The full report will be published in print and online in the next edition of the Parliamentary Year book.

Lobbying: Access And Influence In Whitehall

Over this and previous administrations, the Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is, with constitutional pundits generally, following closely the proposed regulation of lobbyists in Westminster

In January 2009 the House of Commons Public administration Select Committee published its report Lobbying: Access and influence in Whitehall. The report was the first by a parliamentary committee into the lobbying of government since 1991.

Lobbying is publicly associated with the activities of consultancies on behalf of their various clients. But it is also carried out by other kinds of professional representative, such as lawyers, as well as in-house by a vast array of organisations with an interest in public policy and decisions. These range from corporations to trade associations, to charities, to grassroots campaigners.

Lobbying should be — and often is — a force for good. But there is a genuine issue of concern, widely shared and reflected in measures of public trust, that there is an inside track, largely drawn from the corporate world, who wield privileged access and disproportionate influence. Because lobbying generally takes place in private, it is difficult to find out how justified concerns in this area are. This is why there have been demands for greater transparency and why lobbying has been regulated in a number of jurisdictions, generally through registers of lobbyists and lobbying activity.

The Committee proposed that the ethics of the activities of lobbyists should be overseen and regulated by a rigorous and effective single body with robust input from outside the industry.

They proposed that there should be a register of lobbying activity provided for in statute, independently managed and enforced, to include information provided by both lobbyists and those being lobbied, information which should largely be in their hands already.

In its Response, the Government accepted that a "single and credible" regime of lobbying regulation was needed. It stated that its preference was for a system of voluntary self-regulation and that it would keep the industry's progress under review.

The Government accepted at the time that a system of regulation will require a register similar to that proposed in the Select Committee report. However it did not address the conclusion that such a register would have to be statutory to be effective.

Then the Coalition's Programme for Government published in May 2010, contained a commitment to "regulate lobbying through introducing a statutory register of lobbyists and ensuring greater transparency". The proposals in the Government’s consultation paper, Introducing a Statutory Register of Lobbyists, focused the register on those who undertake lobbying activities on behalf of a third party client.

In a report published last Friday however, the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee calls on the Government to scrap its plans to introduce a statutory register of lobbyists.

The Committee says that under the Government’s proposals, a lobbyist who worked in house for a large company such as News International, or Tesco, would not be required to register, however a 'one-man band' lobbyist would be required to register, name their clients, and pay for the privilege.

The Committee has seen no evidence to suggest that third party lobbyists are a particular problem within the lobbying community, indeed the Government’s own records of ministerial meetings suggest that third party lobbyists make up less than 1% of all meetings with Ministers. The report argues that the proposals single out third party lobbyists in an attempt to create a narrow focus for a register that will meet a Coalition pledge, but do little to improve transparency about lobbying.

The Committee recommends that the Government scraps its plans to introduce a statutory register of third party lobbyists, and instead introduce regulation to cover all those who lobby professionally, in a paid role, including those who lobby on behalf, of charities, trade unions, and think tanks.

The Committee recognises that regardless of whether the Government chooses to implement a statutory register, there is much that Government can do to improve transparency about who is lobbying whom. The Committee specifically recommends the Government:

• publish information about ministerial meetings no more than a month after the month in which the meeting occurred(some Departments take up to 8 months to publish meeting details)
• improve the level of detail in meeting disclosures, so that the actual topic of a meeting is disclosed, rather than obscure terms like ‘general discussion'
• publish, where applicable, the company or charity number of any organisation that meets with Ministers or officials, so that the identity of the organisation can be properly verified
• standardize the format of meeting data, with a view to publishing all ministerial and official meetings on one website, rather than on many different Government websites

Graham Allen MP, Chair of the Committee, said:

"The Government proposals target third party lobbyists, yet would produce little more than the current regime of voluntary regulation, without even a statutory code of conduct to regulate behaviour. The UK Public Affairs Council warned that such an approach could even reduce regulation of the lobbying industry.

“The difficulties around this issue were illustrated by the strong views expressed by different Committee members during the course of the inquiry. On the one hand, Paul Flynn was of the opinion that multiplying the scope of the proposals beyond major lobbying companies could lead to resistance to change, burden charities with unnecessary costs and limit the scope for reforms, and he warned that experience in Canada and the EU had shown that lobbyists could find loopholes in a system of medium regulation. He also felt that it would be unwise to miss the opportunity for a thorough strong reform rather than choose the half-way solution of trying to traverse a chasm with two leaps.

“On the other hand, Simon Hart was of the opinion that it was not clear that there was widespread public concern about lobbying and that no statutory register would be better than what the Government currently proposes.

“However, it is to the great credit of Members that the Committee agreed the recommendations in the final report."

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will watch the ongoing debate with interest and report on further news as it happens.

Draft Energy Bill Report

As part of its ongoing reports on the Government’s energy and climate change policy the Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook has been monitoring progress on the draft energy bill. This will form part of a major feature on environment, sustainable energy and climate change in the next edition of the Parliamentary Yeabook

In a report published today MPs on the Energy and Climate Change Committee say that the proposals in the Government’s draft Energy Bill could impose unnecessary costs on consumers, lead to less competition and deter badly needed investment.

On Tuesday, May 22nd 2012, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change announced in a Written Ministerial Statement the publication of a draft Energy Bill.

The Energy and Climate Change Select Committee have been conducting an inquiry to scrutinise the draft Bill. They have finished collecting written and oral evidence and have published their report today.

An informal Lords working group has also been established to consider the Bill. The members of this group are: Lord Oxburgh (Chair), Lord Teverson, Baronness Maddock, Lord Jenkin of Roding, Baronness Worthington, Lord Grantchester, Lord Dixon-Smith, Lord Lawson of Blaby, Lord O’Neill of Clackmannan, Lord Judd, Lord Whitty and Lord Roper. They will be working towards writing to the Department at the end of July:

The Bill is structured to establish a legislative framework for delivering secure, affordable and low carbon energy.

The Bill includes provisions on:

• ELECTRICITY MARKET REFORM (EMR)

The bill puts in place measures to attract the £110 billion investment which is needed to replace current generating capacity and upgrade the grid by 2020, and to cope with a rising demand for electricity. This includes provisions for:

• Contracts for Difference – long-term instruments to provide stable and predictable incentives for companies to invest in low-carbon generation;
• Investment Instruments – long-term instruments to enable early investment in advance of the CfD regime coming into force;
• Capacity Market – to ensure the security of electricity supply;
• Conflicts of Interest and Contingency Arrangements – to ensure the institution which will deliver these schemes is fit for purpose;
• Renewables Transitional – transition arrangements for investments under the renewables obligation scheme, and
• Emissions Performance Standard – to limit carbon dioxide emissions from new fossil fuel power stations.

As set out in the policy overview that was published alongside the draft Energy Bill on 22 May, the Government recognised that industry has strong concerns about the proposed legal framework and payment model for Contracts for Difference. They are seriously considering these concerns and are assessing an alternative model which includes a single counterparty to the CfD, and welcomed consideration of this issue by the Energy and Climate Change Committee as part of its scrutiny of the draft Energy Bill.

• STRATEGY AND POLICY STATEMENT

In addition to EMR, the Energy Bill will also improve regulatory certainty by ensuring that Government and Ofgem are aligned at a strategic level through a Strategy and Policy Statement (SPS), as recommended in the Ofgem Review of July 2011.

• NUCLEAR REGULATION

The Bill places the interim Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) on a statutory footing as the body to regulate the safety and security of the next generation of nuclear power plants. This includes setting out the ONR’s purposes and functions.

• GOVERNMENT PIPE-LINE AND STORAGE SYSTEM

The Bill includes provisions to enable the sale of the Government Pipe-line and Storage System (GPSS). This includes providing for the rights of the Secretary of State in relation to the GPSS, registration of those rights, compensation in respect of the creation of new rights or their exercise, and for transferral of ownership, as well as powers to dissolve the Oil and Pipelines Agency by order.

• MISCELLANEOUS

A minor measure to provide an exception to the prohibition of participating in the transmission of electricity during testing in the commissioning period of Offshore Transmission connections constructed by or on behalf of developers also constructing an offshore generating station.

However, publishing the report today, Tim Yeo MP, Chair of the Energy and Climate Change Committee, said:

"The Government is in danger of botching its plans to boost clean energy, because the Treasury is refusing to back new contracts to deliver investment in nuclear, wind, wave and carbon capture and storage."

In the biggest shake-up of the electricity market since privatisation, the Energy Bill will introduce new system of long-term contracts to give power companies a guaranteed price for the low-carbon electricity they produce. This is intended to reduce the risk of investment in projects with high up-front capital costs, such as nuclear reactors and offshore wind farms.

Initial consultation last year led investors to believe that the "Contracts for Difference" (CfD) would be guaranteed by the State – therefore lowering the cost of capital. But the Treasury has apparently intervened to ensure that the contracts are not government guaranteed. The new model for contracts will spread the liability across various energy companies instead; raising concerns that the plans are now too complex and possibly not legally enforceable. The MPs are calling on the Government to use its AAA-credit rating to underwrite the new contracts in order to keep the costs of energy investment down for consumers.

Tim Yeo MP added:                          
                                        
"Electricity market reform is essential, but the new contracts proposed by the Government will not work for the benefit of consumers in their present form.

“The Government has a lot of work to do over the summer to make sure that the Bill is fit for purpose in the autumn and is not subject to any further delays."

The Committee heard that the spending cap set by the Treasury – which limits the green levies that can be passed on to consumers in energy bills – could introduce an “unacceptable” level of risk to companies who are looking to build new wind, solar, wave or tidal power plants. This is because the levy cap will ration the number of contracts available, creating uncertainty amongst investors about which projects will receive support. This is already having an impact of investment decisions and could paradoxically push-up energy costs for consumers, the Committee warns.

Mr Yeo said:

"Nobody wants to see a blank cheque written out for green energy, but the Government must provide investors with more certainty about exactly how much money will be available."

The Committee is also concerned that the new contract system will reinforce the dominance of the "Big Six" energy companies and prevent new entrants into the electricity market. The Government says it wants to increase competition and improve the opportunities for new entrants in the electricity market. But witnesses told the Committee that the Energy Bill as it stands will in fact deliver the exact opposite of this ambition, threatening the viability of smaller-scale independent energy companies.

And Mr Yeo added:

"Community owned energy projects and small independent generators are in danger under the current plans of being squeezed out. The Committee is worried that decisions about support for new nuclear power stations are being made "behind closed doors" and calls for an independent expert to inspect any agreements to ensure that they are delivering value for money. Energy efficiency could be one of the cheapest way of cutting carbon and improving energy security and the MPs urge the Government to consider incentives for power companies to reduce demand. The Government should also set a clear target to largely decarbonise the electricity sector by 2030 to provide investors greater certainty about the direction of energy policy."

The Government must rethink its plans urgently so that the investment that is needed to replace the UK’s aging power stations, cut carbon emissions and maintain energy security can be delivered. The Committee says that the Government must come up with a stronger contract design before the Bill is expected to be introduced to Parliament in the autumn.

Tim Yeo MP concluded:

"If the Energy Bill does not set a target to largely decarbonise the electricity sector by 2030, then the UK may miss one of the biggest opportunities it has to create a low-carbon economy in the most cost effective way."

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on the progress of the bill as we go through the months ahead.

Improving School Food

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook has been monitoring progress in Government policy relating to healthy eating in schools since Jamie Oliver’s ground breaking  campaign to improve school food in 2005. This will form part of a major feature on healthy living in the next edition

In the seven years since Jamie Oliver began his campaign to improve school food, there has been a measurable improvement in the number of children taking up school meals and the nutritional quality of the food they are eating. This is the result of work done by a large array of people, including the School Food Trust, associated charities such as School Food Matters and Jamie Oliver’s Foundation – not to mention the individual cooks, teachers, parents, pupils, outside caterers and local authorities who have embraced the cause.

There is, however, still much to do. A recent report for the School Food Trust indicated that quality varies across the country. Some schools have transformed their school dinners; many have also introduced food growing into the curriculum and continue to teach cooking, to give children a lasting education in eating well. But others still struggle to serve good-tasting, nutritious food. The ability of academies to depart from the Food Standards has also stimulated debate about how much freedom schools should have. There is no evidence that food in academies has deteriorated. But the Government accepts the need to consider how the quality of food in all schools can be improved.

School Food Trust research shows that:

• take up of school lunches is just 38 per cent in secondary schools and 44 per cent in primary schools
• only 22.5 per cent of schools provide at least one portion of fruit and veg per pupil every day
• half of secondary schools offer pizzas and starchy food cooked in oil on most days
• a third of young people are not choosing a healthy balanced meal at school.

So last week the Government announced that it had asked the co-founders of LEON restaurant chain, Henry Dimbleby and John Vincent, to examine school food across the country. They will create an action plan to accelerate improvement in school food and determine the role of food more broadly in school life.

Henry Dimbleby and John Vincent co-founded the LEON restaurant chain in 2004. Prior to founding LEON, they both have experience of leading large scale change in commercial organisations at the management consultancy Bain & Company and, for John, from the work he did turning around the spirits company, Whyte and Mackay. Prior to Bain, John worked at Procter and Gamble. Henry worked as a chef and as a journalist.
Henry is a founder and director of the not-for-profit Sustainable Restaurant Association.

The plan from Henry and John will examine which schools are doing things well and why. It will set out how all schools can reach a standard to be proud of. They will speak to experts, review research and visit schools as well as conduct primary research in order to build up a systematic picture of school food across England.
An important part of their work will involve looking at what factors influence school food choices.

To ensure that our children are eating well in schools the plan will address two key questions:

• what more needs to be done to make tasty, nutritious food available to all school children?
• how do we excite children about the food so that they want to eat it?

Henry and John have experience in creating nutritious food that tastes good, in large volume, to a budget.
They will be looking at all ways that change can be brought about: leadership, communication, rewards, inspiration, training, structures and supply chain, regulation, responsibilities within schools, reporting, and the role of parents and people from the world of food.

Education Secretary Michael Gove said:

“There has been an improvement in school food in recent years with many schools transforming school dinners, introducing food growing into the curriculum and teaching cookery. However, there is still more to do particularly in taking localised successes and ensuring they are replicated nationally.

“Henry Dimbleby and John Vincent bring a wealth of practical experience in delivering good food on a budget. I am delighted they have agreed to develop a robust plan to improve school food and ensure children are given an education that cultivates in them an understanding of food and nutrition.”

John Vincent said:

“We have a mission at LEON to make it easy for everybody to eat good food. We do it commercially with LEON, and so we are energised by the chance to do so with School Food. We join a powerful and growing team of people who have done so much. What we all now need is an action plan that gets to grips with exactly how the ideas and dreams can be implemented for all kids, and stick.”

Henry Dimbleby said:

“There is so much good work being done to improve school food by people in schools around the country. Our job is to find out which schools are doing well and why. This is a great opportunity to work with those people to set out in a systematic way what needs to be done to nurture and accelerate those improvements.”

This an independent review on behalf of the Secretary of State, and will report directly to him.

Henry and John will work with the Department for Education – seeking input from sector bodies, existing campaign groups, local authorities, caterers, schools and parents – to establish the facts needed to put together their plan. These include:

• what is the current best practice in the UK and abroad?
• how can the best be made even better?
• what other creative ways might there be to raise standards?
• what support is needed by those schools that have struggled to make improvements?
• what motivates children and parents when they are choosing between school food and packed lunches?
• what are the features of successful provision of school food?
• how might government work alongside other relevant bodies such as the School Food Trust to deliver this?

They will use this work to draw up an action plan that lays out what needs to be done to accelerate the work of the last seven years to ensure that all children eating in English schools are offered good food and given an education that cultivates in them an understanding of food and nutrition.

They will deliver their plan in 2013.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on all aspects of our health and lifestyle as we go through the months ahead.

Reform Of The Water Industry

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is currently gathering news items for major features on the effects of climate change in the next edition and has been monitoring response to the Natural Environment White Paper and the Government’s draft Bill, “Water for Life”

In the Queen’s Speech on 9^th May it was announced that a draft Bill will be published to reform the water industry in England and Wales.

The draft Bill, Water for Life, describes a vision for future water management in which the water sector is resilient, in which water companies are more efficient and customer focused and in which water is valued as the precious and finite resource it is. And it explains that we all have a part to play in the realisation of this vision.

One of the Key reforms proposed was the introduction of a package of reforms to extend competition in the water sector by increasing choice for business customers and public sector bodies and by making the market more attractive to new entrants

In a report published last week, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee examined the proposals to reform the water industry in England to increase competition in the sector. MPs conclude that Defra should set a clear target date for opening a competitive retail market for water, and should take account of lessons that can be learned from Scotland, where retail competition has already been introduced.

Anne McIntosh MP, Chair of the Committee said:

"We welcome plans to increase competition in the water industry, although we believe that the White Paper’s proposals for reform will fail to deliver a well-functioning retail market. We suggest how to remedy this and we look forward to examining revised proposals in more detail once the draft Water Bill is published".

Today the plans to reform the water industry were published in Parliament as the Government seeks to slash red tape, drive innovation and open the market to new companies.

Under the proposals, which have been published for pre-legislative scrutiny, all businesses and public sector bodies in England will be able to switch their water and sewerage suppliers, allowing them to obtain more competitive prices, improve their efficiency and tender for services better suited to meet their individual needs.

Evidence suggests that opening up the water market and allowing businesses to switch supplier could deliver benefits to the economy of £2 billion over 30 years. In Scotland, after similar reforms were introduced, the public sector alone is set to save around £20 million over the next three years.

Secretary of State for Environment, Caroline Spelman said,

“This draft Bill will create a modern customer focused water industry and for the first time all businesses and other organisations will be able to shop around for their water and sewerage suppliers.

“By slashing red tape we will also stimulate a market for new water resources and incentivise more water recycling.

“This will ensure that the water industry continues to provide an affordable and clean water supply which is essential for the nation’s economic growth while at the same time protecting the environment for future generations.”

Businesses, charities and public organisations with multiple sites will also be able to receive just one combined water and sewerage bill for all their offices and buildings across England and Scotland.

Regina Finn, Ofwat Chief Executive Officer said:

“This Bill is good for the customer, the economy and the environment. As well as, for the first time, giving choice to 1.2 million businesses and other organisations, the Bill is expected to benefit the economy by almost £2 billion. The reforms will help the country become better at valuing, managing and using our water. Now is the time for all players to step up to the plate to deliver the vision of the Bill – including the industry, regulators, consumer bodies and Government.”

The draft legislation will remove current regulations which act as a barrier to new entrants wishing to enter into the water and sewerage market. Currently any new entrant needs to negotiate with up to 21 water companies before entering the market. Under these changes there will be no need to do this as Ofwat will set out standard terms and conditions for companies to follow. It will also encourage existing companies to look at offering alternative supplies and services.

The legislation will also make it easier for bulk water trading within the industry, allowing water companies to work more closely to find long term solutions to water security issues.

Increased competition in the wholesale market will give water companies an incentive to come up with cheaper, more sustainable solutions to sourcing water.

The Bill will also make the costs of connecting new developments to the water and sewerage system more transparent. Developers will benefit from the extension of environmental permits to include water abstraction licensing and flood defence consents – reducing the red tape around environmental regulation.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on the progress of the White Paper and the impact on competition and UK water supplies as we go through the months ahead.

Water for life?

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is currently gathering news items for major features on the effects of climate change in the next edition and has been monitoring response to the Natural Environment White Paper and the Government’s draft Bill, “Water for Life”

In the Queen’s Speech on 9^th May it was announced that a draft Bill will be published to reform the water industry in England and Wales.

The draft Bill, Water for Life, describes a vision for future water management in which the water sector is resilient, in which water companies are more efficient and customer focused and in which water is valued as the precious and finite resource it is. And it explains that we all have a part to play in the realisation of this vision.

The Key reforms proposed were:

• Over the long-term the introduction of a reformed water abstraction regime, as signalled in the Natural Environment White Paper earlier in the year
• Changes that can be made now to deal with the legacy of over-abstraction of our rivers
• The re-affirmation of the Government’s new catchment approach to dealing with water quality and wider environmental issues
• The removal of barriers to the greater trading of abstraction licences and bulk supplies of water to make our supply system more flexible
• With the Environment Agency and Ofwat, the provision of clearer guidance to water companies on planning for the long-term, and keeping demand down
• Consultation on the introduction of national standards and a new planning approval system for sustainable drainage
• Payments to address the historical unfairness of high bills in the South West
• Encouraging water companies to introduce social tariffs to support vulnerable customers
• The introduction of a package of reforms to extend competition in the water sector by increasing choice for business customers and public sector bodies and by making the market more attractive to new entrants
• Collaboration on a campaign to save water and protect the environment, working with water companies, regulators and customers to raise awareness of the connection between how water is used and the quality of our rivers.

Then in a report published yesterday, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee said that Ministers must act with urgency to prepare for a future where water resources in England will come under increasing pressure.

MPs called on the Government to take rapid steps to tackle the environmental damage caused by the over-abstraction of water, and set more ambitious targets to increase levels of metering.

Launching the report, Anne McIntosh MP, EFRA Committee Chair said:

"We heard persuasive evidence about the environmental damage unleashed by over-abstraction. The Government’s current plans - to reform the abstraction regime by the mid-to-late 2020s - will not take effect rapidly enough given that our rivers are already running dry.

“The reform of abstraction licenses must be brought forward to protect against the effect of severe droughts such as the one we saw earlier this year. Defra must also work with Ofwat and the Environment Agency to tackle urgently those abstractions which are already causing severe damage to our rivers."

The Committee also finds it "extremely disappointing" that the White Paper fails to set a target to increase levels of water metering.

"It's hard to see how the White Paper's call for water to be managed as a precious resource can be reconciled with the lack of any clear target to increase metering levels. Installing a meter is the most effective way to improve water efficiency, providing a clear incentive for householders to minimise wastage," adds Anne McIntosh.

The report highlights how bad debt in the water sector adds around £15 to each household’s water bill every year.

"It is simply unacceptable that hard-pressed yet honest householders are subsidising those who are able but unwilling to pay their water bills. Defra must implement existing legal provisions rapidly to tackle this problem," says Ms McIntosh.

The Committee also examines proposals to reform the water industry in England to increase competition in the sector. MPs conclude that Defra should set a clear target date for opening a competitive retail market for water, and should take account of lessons that can be learned from Scotland, where retail competition has already been introduced.

"We welcome plans to increase competition in the water industry, although we believe that the White Paper’s proposals for reform will fail to deliver a well-functioning retail market. We suggest how to remedy this and we look forward to examining revised proposals in more detail once the draft Water Bill is published," adds Anne McIntosh.

The Committee calls on the Government to take action to encourage the development of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), which can reduce the risk of flooding, and to implement the relevant outstanding provisions of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.

MPs also say that it is "deeply worrying" that the Government had not yet reached an agreement with insurers about providing cover for homes in areas of flood risk.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on the progress of the White Paper and the impact on UK water supplies as we go through the months ahead.

Rio+20 Achievements

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is currently gathering news items for major features on sustainable energy and climate change in the next edition and has been monitoring progress at Rio+20 towards a greener future

United Nations senior officials have highlighted the achievements made during the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) held from 20^th to 22^nd June in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, stressing that they represent a global movement of change in which governments, the private sector and civil society all contribute to achieve global prosperity while protecting the environment.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said at a General Assembly meeting on 28^th June on the outcome of the Conference:

“Let me be clear. Rio+20 was a success, in Rio, we saw the further evolution of an undeniable global movement for change.”

More than 40,000 people – including parliamentarians, mayors, UN officials, chief executive officers and civil society leaders – attended Rio+20 from 20-22 June. The event followed on from the Earth Summit in 1992, also held in Rio de Janeiro, during which countries adopted Agenda 21 – a blueprint to rethink economic growth, advance social equity and ensure environmental protection.

World leaders attending the summit on sustainable development approved the agreements drawn up earlier in the week following negotiations by 193 countries.

In his remarks, Mr. Ban highlighted several parts of the Rio+20 outcome document, entitled ‘The Future We Want,’ which he hailed as “an important victory for multilateralism after months of difficult negotiations.”

These sentiments were echoed by the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman who welcomed the progress made towards a more sustainable future at Rio+20.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who led the UK delegation, set out the UK’s ambition to build on the Rio+20 agreement. Addressing the final plenary, he said:

“This week we have agreed to set Sustainable Development Goals. I want to see progress in agreeing these within the post-2015 development framework, so that – as at the original Rio conference – the environment and development are again part of a coherent whole. I would like to think that the ideas we have promoted here – governments, civil society, consumers and business working together and concepts like the green economy and natural capital – will be central to the way we all behave.

“We need to turn words into action. We need to work together to change behaviours, to change all our mindsets and put our world on a more sustainable footing. That’s why the UK Environment Secretary and I have been using the unique platform that Rio provides to talk to fellow leaders from around the world about how we turn these ideas into reality.”

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman, who led talks in reaching the agreement, said:

“We came to Rio with a clear set of ambitious aims on totally new concepts such as Sustainable Development Goals and GDP+, and we should be positive that we have made good progress on all them.

“Rio+20 has shown that there is political ambition for change. Now we have to make sure that will is not squandered. We have already started to make headway in the talks held since the text was agreed, such as good progress towards deciding on the themes the Sustainable Development Goals should cover.”

Key points from the agreement for the UK are:

• Agreement to establish Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The United Nations General Assembly will appoint a group of representatives from 30 countries by September to develop the goals, with our aim for these goals to focus on food, water and energy
• Recognition of the importance of the green economy as a way to help nations to grow sustainably, and to help eradicate poverty
• A call from all nations at Rio+20 for businesses to adopt ways of reporting on their sustainability performance, as championed by the UK delegation and businesses such as Aviva.
• Recognition by all nations at Rio+20 of the importance of including the value of natural capital and social wellbeing into decision making will be given real force by having a UN commission undertake the work on GDP plus.
• Oceans to be given greater prominence with a commitment to extend marine conservation to on the high seas.
• A call for enhanced efforts to sustainably manage forests including reforestation, restoration and afforestation. The agreement highlights the importance of initiatives such as REDD+ in reducing emissions from deforestation.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Caroline Spelman have been working to implement the agreed text over the final three days of the summit.

A Natural Capital Summit was hosted by Nick Clegg with the leaders of nations including Norway, Denmark, Costa Rica and Gabon to announce that 50 countries and 50 global firms have made commitments to include the value of natural resources in their accounts as part of the World Bank’s 50/50 campaign.

Caroline Spelman held talks with world leaders including Presidents and Prime Ministers to discuss how to take forward work on Sustainable Development Goals, which led to a developing consensus on the themes that SDGs should cover – including food, water and energy that the UK has pushed for.

Rio+20 has also been used as an opportunity for many bilateral meetings with other nations to discuss environmental projects, trade, and ways to boost growth and create jobs in the UK.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on environmental issues and their impact on the UK as we go through the months ahead.

£6 Million Fund To Support Library Partnerships With The Arts

In these times of austerity, the Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is currently following closely the arrangements for the funding of arts and heritage organisations for a major feature in the next edition

At the government’s request, Arts Council England assumed responsibility for the development of public libraries in October 2011. The Government and the Arts Council invest more than £500,000 a year to support development work in libraries.

A package of measures to support a vibrant, sustainable, 21st Century public library service was announced by Culture Minister Ed Vaizey last week in a speech to the 7th National Library Services conference in London.

Outlining his vision for the future of libraries in England, Mr Vaizey announced that: the Arts Council will make £6 million available to help libraries work with arts and cultural organisations and local communities; a series of pilots will test automatic library membership for primary school children; and, for the first time, comparative reports will be published to show how library authorities’ services compare across England.

Mr Vaizey said:

“Despite the pressures on local authority budgets there continues to be innovation and development in library services up and down the country. And now that Arts Council England has taken on responsibility for the development of libraries, individual services are forging important new links with arts and cultural organisations.

“I want to see libraries expand their role and become hubs for access to local arts and culture. The Arts Council fund is a hugely exciting development for our vital library services.”
The three new initiatives are:

• a £6 million Arts Council fund – as part of the Grants for the Arts programme - designed to help people get involved in arts and cultural activity through libraries. The grants, which will be open to applications from September, will be available to library authorities in England to fund partnerships with artists, arts organisations and cultural bodies. Arts Council England will release details of how library services can apply to the Grants for the Arts fund to encourage public libraries to work with artists and arts organisations before the fund opens to applications in September 2012.

• new ‘comparative profile reports’ for all library authorities in England, commissioned and paid for by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) for one year. The reports, developed by the Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accounting (CIPFA), will allow library authorities to benchmark their services against others across the country. The DCMS-commissioned reports, based on 2011/12 survey data, are expected to be published in December and will help library authorities to consider their performance and improve services. This will allow authorities to compare their services to a grouping of comparable authorities, known as their “nearest neighbours”, and improve services if necessary. Library authorities will be able to commission their own individual reports from CIPFA for years other than 2011-12, including their reports for 2010-11, which are available now. The data will be publicly available on-line

• adopting former Children’s Laureate Michael Rosen’s idea of piloting the introduction of library cards for primary school children. DCMS, the Department for Education (DfE) and the Arts Council will launch pilot projects in September to explore which models work best. Former Children’s Laureate Michael Rosen addressed the idea of library cards for primary school children to Ministers at DfE. The Government will announce the pilot areas and different models in September.

We shall be adding to the article as there are further developments and any changes to the plans will be reflected in the content. A full report covering arts and culture funding of will be published in print and online in the next edition of the Parliamentary Year book.

High Speed Rail – The Completion And Sale Of Hs1

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Yearbook is currently monitoring developments in the UK high speed rail network for major features on transport and the environment in the next edition

The Commons Public Accounts select Committee today published its 4th Report of Session 2012-13, the completion and sale of High Speed 1.

High Speed 1 (HS1), officially known as the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL) and originally as the Union Railway or Continental Main Line (CML), is a 108-kilometre (67 mile) high-speed railway from London through Kent to the British end of the Channel Tunnel.

The line was built to carry international passenger traffic from the United Kingdom to Continental Europe; additionally it carries domestic passenger traffic to and from towns and cities in Kent, and has the potential to carry Berne gauge freight traffic. The line, crossing over the River Medway and underneath the Thames to London St Pancras, opened in full on 14 November 2007. It allows speeds of 230 to 300 kilometres per hour (143 to 186 mph) and cost £5.8 billion to build. There are intermediate stations at Stratford International, Ebbsfleet International and Ashford International.

International passenger services are currently provided by Eurostar, with journey times of London St Pancras to Paris Gare du Nord in 2 hours 15 minutes, and St Pancras to Brussels-South in 1 hour 51 minutes, using a fleet of 27 Class 373/1 multi-system trains capable of 300 kilometres per hour (186 mph). Other, competing, passenger operators are expected to use the line in future.

Domestic high-speed commuter services serving the intermediate stations and beyond began on 13 December 2009. The fleet of 29 Class 395 passenger trains are permitted to reach speeds of 225 kilometres per hour (140 mph).

Publishing the report on the sale and completion of the line, the Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP, Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts, today said:

"Whilst HS1 provides an efficient service, contributing in an important way to British transport infrastructure, there were costly mistakes in the history of the project. These must not be repeated with HS2.

“HS1 was supposed to pay for itself but instead the taxpayer has had to pay out £4.8 billion so far to cover the debt on the project.

“The root of the problem is the inaccurate and wildly optimistic forecasts for passenger numbers both when the line was being planned and when the Department restructured its deal with the contractor, London & Continental Railways Limited. International passenger numbers have only been a third of LCR's original forecast and two thirds of the Department's forecast. The Department failed to take into account the growth of low cost airlines or the competitive response of the ferry companies.

“This isn’t the first time that over-optimistic planning and insufficiently robust testing of planning assumptions has got the Department into trouble. My Committee's report on the East Coast Mainline raised similar concerns.

“HS1 will continue to cost the taxpayer money–£10.2 billion over the next 60 years, so before going ahead with HS2 we need a robust cost benefit analysis.

“Some of the Department's assumptions about the benefits of faster travel are simply untenable. For example, the time business travellers save by using high speed rail is valued at £54 per hour yet the time commuters save getting to and from work is only valued at £7 per hour. It is difficult to see how this can be justified. The Department also assumes that all time spent on a train is unproductive. And unrealistic assumptions about ticket prices act to exaggerate passenger demand forecasts.

“The Department also told us that it had not considered the benefits and costs of alternatives to HS2 such as investment in broadband videoconferencing or investment in alternative, more local train routes.

“It is nonsense that the Department does not have a full understanding of the wider economic impact and regeneration benefits of transport infrastructure, including HS1, to inform future investment decisions.

“All these things are crucial for proving the case for investment in long distance travel and demonstrating value for money.

“The Department must revisit its assumptions on HS2 and develop a full understanding of the benefits and costs of high speed travel compared to the alternatives."

Margaret Hodge was speaking as the Committee published its fourth Report of this Session which, on the basis of evidence from an expert witness and the Department for Transport, examined the High Speed 1 project and the lessons that need to be learnt from it.

The high speed railway linking London to the Channel Tunnel, known as High Speed 1, has now been fully open for almost five years. Since opening, the line has had a good performance record and the Department for Transport (the Department) can be proud of some aspects of the project. A revised timetable and budget were established in 1998 and the line was constructed within this revised timeframe and revised budget. In 2010 the Department managed the sale of HS1 Limited, which has a concession to operate the line for 30 years, in an exemplary manner. The sale, along with the Department’s restructuring of Eurostar UK, which ran the British arm of the international train service, transferred most of the remaining operational risk relating to the line to the private sector, with the project debt being met by the taxpayer.

There have also been some costly mistakes in the history of this project. The Department originally expected London & Continental Railways Limited (LCR), (which was awarded the contract to build the line in 1996), to service the project debt from future revenues from Eurostar UK (the train operator). However by the end of 1997 Eurostar UK revenues were substantially below LCR’s forecasts. Consequently, in 1998, the Department agreed to restructure the deal and guarantee most of LCR’s debt. The Department’s debt guarantees were called upon in June 2009 and the taxpayer is now servicing and repaying the project debt of £4.8 billion.

Passenger demand for international services on the line has been much lower than forecast and that is the root cause of the failure of the original deal and of the call on the Department’s debt guarantees. International passenger numbers have only been one-third of LCR’s original 1995 forecast and two-thirds of the level the Department forecast in 1998. The Department's planning assumptions for the line were wrong; it failed to properly consider the impact on passenger numbers of the growth of low cost airlines and the competitive response of ferry companies. Over-optimistic forecasting and insufficiently robust testing of planning assumptions is a recurring problem, as our previous report on the East Coast Mainline has demonstrated. The Department must learn the lessons from the past and ensure that cost benefit analysis is solid as it develops its plans for HS2.

The Department still does not have plans in place to evaluate fully the impact of High Speed 1. Total taxpayer support for the line, over a 60 year period to 2070, has an estimated present value of £10.2 billion. Benefits for passengers from shorter journey times over this period have an estimated present value of £7 billion. The basis of this cost/benefit analysis is open to challenge. There is a risk that the value of passenger benefits is overstated, for example because the Department’s methodology assumes that all time on a train is unproductive, and a further risk that the wider economic benefits are not taken into account because no appropriate analysis is made.

While difficult, it is disappointing that the Department has not attempted to understand the economic impact and local regeneration benefits achieved so far from High Speed 1. Also it has not assessed the impact on regeneration of decisions on where to locate stations. The Department will need to evaluate HS1’s regeneration benefits and wider economic impacts worth many billions of pounds if the project is to demonstrate value for money. To learn from past decisions and so make well-informed investment decisions in the future the Department, as well as other government departments investing in infrastructure, must improve its understanding and measurement of the economic and regeneration benefits of new infrastructure.

The Parliamentary Information Office of the Parliamentary Year book will continue to report on the progress of HS2 and Government’s response to the Committee’s comments about HS1 as we go through the months ahead.