Rio Agreement (Hansard, 11 November 1992)

§ 4. Dr. Twinn
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what he intends to do consequent upon the Rio agreement and as President of the EC Council of Environment Ministers to improve the implementation of EC law on environmental matters in all member states.

§ The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. David Maclean)
The need for more effective enforcement of environmental laws is one of the central themes of our presidency. I am pleased to say that the Commission has now agreed to my right hon. and learned Friend's request to prepare regular reports on implementation for discussion by the Environment Council, starting in December.

§ Dr. Twinn
Britain has one of the best records of compliance with European environmental laws, but is it not ridiculous for us to be firm and good supporters of the European Community but to allow our partners to put us 863 at a disadvantage due to the increased costs of compliance which result from their not keeping the European laws? Will my hon. Friend make it a matter of priority for the Government to use their presidency to ensure compliance by other member states?

§ Mr. Maclean
I assure my hon. Friend that we have an excellent record on compliance, and we are determined to see enforcement evened up throughout the Community.
I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that only last week in Chester, at the invitation of the British, we had the first meeting of all the environmental inspectorates from around the Community. Excellent progress was made in the network of inspectors. The inspectors have agreed unanimously to maintain and continue the network with a rotating presidency. Even now they are working on measures to ensure even-handed compliance and a high level playing field throughout the whole Community.

§ Mr. Denham
The Government will have no credibility in their discussions with their European partners if they continue to promote the destruction of the environment through measures such as the M3 motorway through Twyford Down. Are there no limits on how far the Government will sink in the promotion of environmental destruction, including the hiring of a private detective agency, Bray's detective agency of Southampton, to photograph peaceful protesters at Twyford Down? Does the Minister have any limits as to how far the Government will go in destroying the environment and suspending the basic civil liberties of Her Majesty's subjects?

§ Mr. Maclean
I regret that the hon. Gentleman takes a tone which drags Britain down unfairly. He should concentrate on this country's record of compliance with environmental legislation in the past few years. Since the United Kingdom joined the Community, the European Court of Justice has not delivered one adverse judgment against it on environmental matters. If the hon. Gentleman compares the records of all countries in the Community he will find that 11 judgments have been made against Italy, 10 against Belgium, seven against Germany, five against France, three against the Netherlands, one each against Denmark, Greece, Spain and Luxembourg, and none against Britain. Why does the hon. Gentleman not speak for Britain for a change?

§ Sir Anthony Durant
Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the National Rivers Authority on its wonderful job of cleaning up the River Thames? The River Thames is now a beautiful river—[Interruption.] particularly in the Reading area. Will he continue to support the actions of the National Rivers Authority?

§ Mr. Maclean
I am delighted to support the excellent work that the NRA has carried out in recent years with a continually increasing budget. Last night I was delighted to attend a joint venture with the Countryside Commission which was sponsored by the Financial Times. With considerable funding from my Department, and with the help of the NRA, the Countryside Commission is taking forward a national trail along the side of the Thames. We shall have a national trail of about 200 miles alongside this excellent river. I look forward to walking part of that trail, probably near Reading.

Mr. John D. Taylor
Does the Minister agree that some environmental policies within the United Kingdom have 864 an impact on the rest of the European Community while others have no impact? In connection with the latter, does he agree that the European Community should keep its nose out?

§ Mr. Maclean
Of course, some policies need to be implemented at a European or international level. That is essential for many environmental policies. However, national Governments can perfectly adequately implement other policies. The House ought to be aware that the European Council of Ministers has decided that work needs to be carried forward in conjunction with the Commission on the principle of subsidiarity. We are working on the general plans and criteria for applying the principle. It would be wrong to assume that the environment has been singled out for special treatment. It has not. However, there is no reason why certain environmental matters should not be covered by the principle of subsidiarity.

§ Mr. Robert B. Jones
I welcome the Chester conference, which was an important initiative. Is not one of the keys to implementation on a European scale the establishment of the European Environment Agency? Is it not hypocritical of the French to lecture us on being uncommunautaire while they are using every power at their disposal to block a Community decision on the location of that important establishment, which should of course be in Britain?

§ Mr. Maclean
Of course, it is terribly important that we get the European Environment Agency up and running. At the last meeting of the Council of Ministers, my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State made strenuous efforts to make progress on the matter. It is unfortunate that some member states could not agree to come to a conclusion on the matter. They considered that other agencies should be included in the package and that agreement could not be reached solely on an environment agency. We shall consider the matter again at our next Council meeting in December, but the British Government are determined that the agency should be up and running as soon as possible in Europe. It is essential if we are to achieve the proper environmental protection and enforcement that we want throughout the Community.

§ Mr. Simon Hughes
Has the Government's apparent problem with ratifying treaties spread to the Department of the Environment? At the Rio summit in June, our Government were keen that everyone should sign the climate change treaty. Indeed, the Government persuaded reluctant countries such as the United States to do so. The United States has now ratified the treaty. Denmark is about to ratify it. The Department of the Environment says that the treaty will be ratified by the end of the year, but the Treasury says that we shall have to wait for all 150 countries to do so ahead of us. What is the truth? Shall we be last yet again?

§ Mr. Maclean
That is nonsense. The hon. Gentleman has been Liberal Democrat environment spokesman for some time and he should know better. We made it crystal clear that we considered the ratification of the climate change and biodiversity conventions to be important. We have always made it clear that we hope and intend to complete our ratification by the end of next year. [HON. MEMBERS: "This year."] Important work needs to be carried out in the European Community to achieve 865 agreement on a host of measures to make ratification mean something. It is easy to ratify a treaty, but if we do not have all the clauses in place to ensure that we cut our carbon dioxide emissions, there is no point in ratification. We shall ratify the convention on time and take the necessary steps to ensure that we comply with it.

§ Mrs. Gorman
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important to make haste slowly on implementation of some of the conditions because scientific evidence is constantly emerging which introduces a new aspect on some of this stuff, and especially on carbon dioxide emissions? Many scientists now say that carbon dioxide is a beneficial gas and that the amount in the atmosphere is not a danger and does not cause global warming.

§ Mr. Maclean
Far be it from me to disagree with my hon. Friend on too many occasions, but I do not accept that we should go very slowly on this. We should proceed sensibly. There is a clear body of scientific evidence that increased carbon dioxide emissions are damaging the atmosphere and the planet on which we live. That is unacceptable. We believe in the precautionary principle. I intend to make progress as quickly as is practicable in the circumstances, and we shall continue to do so.

§ Mr. Chris Smith
The Minister of State appears to take too lightly Britain's responsibilities to fulfil the commitments that we made both to the European Community and at Rio. Chief among the Rio commitments was the drawing up of a national sustainability plan. Will the Minister tell us whether he stands by that commitment? Will the plan be a forward-looking document, setting out objectives and targets? If so, when will it appear, and how will he go about drawing it up?

§ Mr. Maclean
First, I am delighted formally to welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new position—although I have already welcomed him in another debate a couple of weeks ago. I tell him—and I may chastise him slightly, as I did last time—that he ought to pay more attention to what we have been doing. We intend to produce our own report to the Sustainable Development Commission. Even now, we are working on its design and we shall consult a range of organisations on what they believe should go into the plan. We shall publish the consultation document shortly, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be one of those who respond to it. We want as many ideas as possible—even, no doubt, impractical ones—about what should go into the report. We are working to ensure that in the United Nations the Sustainable Development Commission is as high powered and efficient as possible.