House of Commons Liaison Committee

Oral evidence from the Prime Minister

Oral and Written Evidence

Tuesday 11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 11 December 2012 and 16 January 2013

HC 484-ii and -iii Published on 26 March 2013 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £6.00 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SE] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 20 Liaison Committee: Evidence

Oral evidence

Taken before the Liaison Committee on Tuesday 11 December 2012

Members present: Sir Alan Beith (Chair)

Mr Adrian Bailey Andrew Miller Mr Clive Betts Mr Andrew Tyrie Sir Malcolm Bruce Keith Vaz James Duddridge Joan Walley Dr Hywel Francis Mr Tim Yeo Miss Anne McIntosh ______

Examination of Witness

Witness: Rt Hon David Cameron MP, Prime Minister, gave evidence.

Q98 Chair: Welcome, Prime Minister. We are glad Q99 Chair: Is it about just winning public to have you with us this afternoon. As you know, we confidence, or is it a view that we have been too are going to cover the direction in which the criminal lenient towards some people? justice and policing system will be going, and then we Mr Cameron: I think the two go together. The will look at green Government. We also have a couple purposes of punishment are obviously deterrence and of questions at the end from Sir Malcolm Bruce about also retribution. I do not think that retribution is a the post-2015 development goals. dirty word. In a civilised society, we give up our rights You made a speech to the Centre for Social Justice on to punish other people and vest that right in the state, 22 October in which you talked about being “tough and the state has to do the job properly. Otherwise, but intelligent” in dealing with crime—that sounds we lack confidence in the society and the state to pretty good. You appointed a new Lord Chancellor, which we belong. Punishment has the purpose to and you said that his driving vision was to see “more deter, but also to demonstrate society’s anger about people properly punished, but fewer offenders something, and that is why the rules are as they are. returning to the system.” What types of offenders were not being properly punished? Q100 Chair: Is it going to mean that we need more Mr Cameron: I think, for some offences, that we see prison places? punishments that do not necessarily have the Mr Cameron: I hope it doesn’t. We should build as confidence of the public. When I say “tough but many prison places as we need to house the convicted intelligent”, it means more of both. I think there are criminals that we have, but the intention behind our some instances when we need a tougher response and policy is to say— If you look at the situation we a response that the public can have confidence in, but inherited, each prison place costs £45,000 and half of it is not just about banging up more people in prison. people reoffend within with two years. It is a badly broken and expensive system, so that is why the It is, as the Lord Chancellor has said, about trying to whole emphasis is on the fact that, yes, we must be ensure that fewer of them return, which means a tough, because the public expect that and I believe greater focus on rehabilitation, the programmes in that, but we want to be intelligent, because we want prison and all the rest of it. fewer people returning to prison, so let us have more There are some specific areas where I think that the education in prisons and more programmes in response has not been satisfactory, so we have made prisons—this so-called rehabilitation revolution, some changes. For instance, there is the change on where we want to have organisations paid by results knife crime, where now offences committed with a if they can keep people out of prison. That is all about knife have a stiff minimum sentence. That would be trying to reduce the costs of the criminal justice one example, and another would be the recent system because, in common with every area that you sentencing paper, in which we introduced some are going to ask me about, Sir Alan, we are having to mandatory life sentences for second very, very violent do more with less. If we are going to try to do better and serious offences. Again, that is an area where I criminal justice with less money, we have to ensure think the public and I would feel that two of the most that we are making savings. serious offences should carry a mandatory life sentence. That does not mean that you are in prison Q101 Chair: Indeed, in that speech, you said: for life, but I think that the concept of the life “We’ve tried just banging people up and it’s failed… sentence—where you give up your liberty and even if So I’m not going to try and out-bid any other you get out of prison, the state can call you back into politician on toughness, saying ‘let’s just bang them prison, and therefore it is a life sentence—is supported up for longer, let’s have more isolation’”. You said: by the public. I support that, and I think it was a “let’s use that time…inside to have a proper positive good advance. impact”. I very much agree with you but, as you have cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 21

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP just said, the MOJ has to take its share of the cuts to outside, take them away and a place will be found for cope with the deficit. At the same time, we are going them. It may result in overcrowding like at Lincoln to need at least as many prison places if my prison, but they will put them somewhere. If you assumption about what you said earlier is correct. It actually say that what this person needs is something costs money to provide the regimes that make good to repay the community, and action to deal with use of the time that people are inside, does it not? alcohol or drug abuse, you have to start inquiring Mr Cameron: It does. There are a number of ways whether it is available locally and will it be good that we can save money, but there are two basic ways. enough to meet this person’s need. What your You have the basic cost of £45,000 per prisoner, which authority would be useful in doing is making sure that is very expensive. The process that Chris Grayling is the programmes are there. going through of looking at an element of contracting Mr Cameron: I accept that; it is really what the out in terms of prisons, but also ensuring that existing rehabilitation revolution is about. The ambition is that providers reduce their costs, is one way of saving for everyone but the toughest cases, by the end of money. The other way is obviously getting fewer 2015, all those people being punished in the people to return to prison, where there is the whole community should be on programmes where the idea of paying all the probation services effectively by organisations are paid by results. I hope that that will results. But also this is trying to make sure that as bring into this area a lot of new organisations and people leave prison, there is a proper pathway, instead a lot of new thinking about how you turn people’s of—as Chris Grayling himself put it—just putting lives around. some money in the hand of the prisoner and opening the door. It is about actually making sure that as soon Q104 Chair: Are we going to have a White Paper or as you leave prison, you are into a programme where a Green Paper on the rehabilitation revolution? you get rehabilitation and help to keep you out of Mr Cameron: Well, we have had some changes prison. already on the community sentences. On a Green Paper, I will have to write to you about the exact Q102 Chair: There was another interesting passage process of this reform. Perhaps I can give you some in that speech when you said “for anyone sentenced detail about that.1 to a spell in prison, there will be space in prison… The number of people behind bars will not be about Q105 Chair: It just seems to me that you and your bunks available, it will be about” the number of staff in No. 10 carry a lot of weight in Departments. people sentenced. It struck me that there was a Sometimes you use it to get particular outcomes. It sentence missing there. Shouldn’t there have been a would be unfortunate if the only outcome was on the sentence that said, “And for anyone the judge thinks maybe necessary public confidence side, and it was should be on a tough community programme with his not in achieving the other side of what you were drug and alcohol addiction being treated, there will be arguing for. Are you making sure that that part of what a space on a programme”? you want is going to be delivered? Mr Cameron: Yes, that is a fair point. One of the Mr Cameron: Yes. I would argue that the No. 10 things we have done is to say that every community influence on this process is pretty balanced. penalty should include an element of punishment. I Obviously, I want the Government to have serious want sentencers, magistrates, Crown courts and the regard to public confidence in the criminal justice public to have confidence in community sentences so system. I think, as Prime Minister, that that is that judges feel able to give them in appropriate important. Actually it is No. 10 and, to an extent, the circumstances, knowing that the public will think that policy unit that have been very active in pushing the is a tough option, not a soft option. There are whole agenda of the rehabilitation revolution, wanting definitely people who go to prison who shouldn’t be to get more programmes into prison and wanting to there, particularly with very short sentences, because be more aggressive about payment by results, so I see there is not much time to educate, reform and turn us very much as a force for trying to push that reform. around the life of someone who gets a short prison To me, the two go together. You’ve got a better chance sentence. Sometimes the sentencers feel frustrated that of taking the public with you on the intelligent part of they don’t have a good, tough community penalty. rehabilitation—teaching prisoners to read, having This is the intelligent bit, if you like, of “tough but more drugs programmes and all the rest of it—and intelligent”. I would add to that GPS tags. I think that getting in things that will work if the public have an the idea of tracking tags is quite attractive, because overall confidence that this is not a soft system, but a you can hopefully create a sort of virtual prison, as it tough, proper and robust system. To me the two have were, whereby someone does not go to prison but, always gone together. I do not see any conflict because they are on a tracking tag, you can make sure between the two, and I think that No. 10 is pretty that they are not going to places they shouldn’t go evenly balanced on the two. to. So we need to be more intelligent about how we punish people. Q106 Chair: Just one quick point on another justice matter: judicial review. You made some rather strong Q103 Chair: What worried me about that bit in the comments about the impediment that it posed to speech was that you seemed to be addressing a certain kinds of development, but aren’t the changes problem that does not really exist, rather than the you plan to make—increasing the cost, for example— problem that does. If you are a judge or a magistrate and you sentence someone to custody, a van will wait 1 Ev 36 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 22 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP an impediment to the little man who is being pushed Q108 Keith Vaz: If you look at the leadership of the around by the Executive? police, as opposed to the grass roots, does it concern Mr Cameron: I just think that there has been an you that 26 of the 43 police forces either do not have explosion in the number of reviews. I have the figures: a chief constable, or have a chief constable who is in 1998, there were 4,500 applications; that has tripled about to retire? in a decade. Some are clearly well-founded—there are Mr Cameron: I saw those figures in an article in The cases such as the west coast main line, which was Sunday Times. I have had them checked and we don’t an important judicial review—but I think it has now recognise them—I don’t think they are 100% right. become a mechanism to slow down things you don’t There have been some big challenges to policing, as I agree with and to try to fur up the system. have just said. There have also been the challenges of One of the things I have found as Prime Minister—I the Leveson report and all that. Again, what I would made this point in a speech yesterday—is about the say from the chief constables I come into contact process of getting things done because of consultation, with—I see quite a number while travelling round the statutory consultees, judicial reviews and legal country—is that we are very fortunate to have some constraints. Some of them are perfectly reasonable, extremely talented chief constables. Bernard Hogan- but more and more things have grown up in the Howe, who has come in to run the Met, is extremely system, some of which are not necessary. capable and competent, and Sara Thornton, my own Our proposals are: to shorten the length of time chief constable in Thames Valley, has managed to deal following an initial decision that you can make an with these spending reductions without really any application; to halve the number of opportunities that reduction in front-line policing at all, as far as I can are currently available to challenge; and to reform the see. I know that there is a lot more new talent coming fees so that they actually cover the costs of providing through the police force. the judicial review proceedings which, in a time of straitened circumstances, is only fair. In doing those Q109 Keith Vaz: You don’t think it is anything more things, you are not abolishing judicial review; you are than a natural changeover. just trying to ensure it is reasonable. Mr Cameron: There are one or two individual circumstances. There has been a removal of a chief Q107 Keith Vaz: Prime Minister, may we turn to constable in one or two cases. Otherwise, you do get police morale? Some 95% of police officers feel that times, in any organisation, when you get quite a lot of the Government do not support them and 50% want change at the top. What I see of the chief constables to change their jobs. Lord Stevens, a former I come across is that they extremely capable and Commissioner, said that there was a national crisis in competent people. policing. Bearing in mind that the Police Federation was once referred to as the Conservative party at Q110 Keith Vaz: Was the turnout in the recent 2 prayer, are you worried that it is now demonstrating PCC elections a worry? If we take the west against the Government and that there is so much midlands, for example, Bob Jones was elected with concern about your policing agenda? less than 12% of the population. Mr Cameron: First, let me put on record that I think Mr Cameron: It was disappointing—I will not hide the British police do a magnificent job. They are that—just as I thought the turnout in some of the extremely brave individuals. I see them every day of recent by-elections was disappointing. First of all, I my life and the work that they do. I have enormous think something like 5 million people voted for police respect for them. It is an organisation of which we can and crime commissioners, which is a huge amount be very proud as a country. I totally understand that more than voted for their predecessors, as it were. they are facing a number of challenges right now and What I feel confident about is that, from now on, that we have made cuts to police budgets which are every community has a local law and order champion. presenting huge challenges for British policing. My That person will make their voice heard and will call sense is that, yes, there are challenges, but they are the police to account. They will become well known meeting these challenges very effectively. over the next four to five years, and when the next set When I look at the figures, what I see is the most of elections comes, I am confident that the turnout important thing—that crime is falling. Victim will be higher. Sometimes these reforms take time to satisfaction with policing is stable or up. The response demonstrate their worth, but we have some talented times that the police are giving the public are stable. candidates who got elected, and I look forward to them making an impact. If you look at front-line policing, the number of community officers has actually increased over recent years. Q111 Keith Vaz: I do not expect you to have read Of course there are challenges, and I totally accept the Select Committee’s report on drugs, but today that the police are being asked to do a number of HSBC was fined £1.2 billion in respect of the money things at once. You have had the pay freeze and you laundering of, basically, drugs profits. We have recommended that those at the senior level of banks have reforms to pensions, the Winsor review of should actually face criminal sanctions. Only 1% of allowances and conditions, and budget reductions. We drugs profits are caught within the banking system. are asking public services to do a huge amount, and Do you think we need to be tougher on the penalties my response is to say to the police, “Thank you for for those who launder money in this way? responding so positively and doing all these things while providing a fantastic service.” 2 Police and Crime Commissioners cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 23

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Mr Cameron: I have not read your report, and I look impossible for us to have those sorts of capabilities. forward to doing so. As I was on the Home Affairs Then people say, “What about public interest Committee when it previously looked at this issue, I immunity certificates?” Of course, PIIs help, but PIIs will have a look at your report. mean that you cannot produce the evidence in court; Keith Vaz: And we miss you. the evidence is taken out of the court. That is why I Mr Cameron: Thank you very much. I was think you do need, in a limited number of cases, particularly interested in what you said about legal closed material proceedings, where this evidence can highs. I thought that looked rather an interesting be properly looked at in court. policy suggestion, and I have asked my team at No. Of course, I think it is good that this is being properly 10 to have a look at it. scrutinised by Parliament. I pay tribute to your On the issue of money laundering, it is a very serious Committee for looking into it and making sure we get offence. We do have quite strict controls in this this right. However, the simple idea is that it is only country in terms of how banking regulation and for civil cases—not for criminal cases or inquests— money laundering regulation works. I have always that you need to have this special procedure. It is not said with respect to bankers that if they get it wrong, a massive departure, because we have the Special they should, like anybody else, feel the full force of Immigration Appeals Tribunal. It only happens with the law. the permission of the judge, not under the order of the politician. If you have those safeguards and that Q112 Keith Vaz: Finally, yesterday at the approach, it seems to me that this is important. Westminster lunch, you mentioned the case of Jacintha Saldanha. You expressed sympathy for the Q114 Dr Francis: Can I press you on this question family and they are very grateful for what you said. of transparency? Both the majority in the Lords and Do you think it is important that they be given the full my Committee were concerned about this issue. This facts of what happened in this case? is a time when there is a great deal of public suspicion Mr Cameron: Yes, of course. First of all, let me say about many of our national institutions. Do you think again that this was a dreadful case and it is an absolute that anything that decreases transparency in the tragedy for the family. When you read of how hard judicial process, especially if it is triggered by the she had worked across her life, of all the things she Government, would only deepen that suspicion? had done and of how much she cared about health and Mr Cameron: If it was only triggered by the looking after people, it is a terrible, terrible case. As I Government, I could see your point. The point, as the said yesterday, I am sure there are lessons to learn. I independent reviewer of terrorism said, is, “There is think that, when these things happen, having the full a small…category of national-security related claims, facts of the case does not bring anybody back, but both for judicial review of executive decisions and for it does help people to come to terms with what has civil damages, in respect of which it is preferable that 3 happened. In so far as that is possible, I would the option of a CMP …should exist.” That is what support that. our adviser on terrorism—someone who has a deep history of supporting civil liberties in our country—is Q113 Dr Francis: Good afternoon, Prime Minister. telling us. I’d like to ask you some questions about the Justice Yes, of course a closed material proceeding is less and Security Bill. You will be aware that the transparent than an ordinary civil case. But there is a amendments to the Bill passed in the Lords were reason for having a closed material proceeding, which based on recommendations made by the Joint is that if you do not have one, the case will not be Committee on Human Rights, which I chair. Do you heard. We are not talking about a bit of justice that understand fully why a considerable majority in the previously was open; we are saying that in order for Lords shared my Committee’s anxieties about the lack justice to be done, in order for our intelligence of effective judicial control over closed material agencies to be able to produce evidence in a court of procedures in the Bill? Will the Government be law so that innocence or guilt can be proved in a civil case, we need these closed material proceedings. It is coming forward with amendments that properly not making the system less transparent; it is address this concern? extending justice. Mr Cameron: The short answer is yes and yes. Let me stand back from the whole thing for a second. I think that this Bill is important. The key proposal in Q115 Dr Francis: But the Bill contains nothing at all it is important for a very simple reason. I feel this to ensure that Parliament is closely involved in quite strongly as Prime Minister, having been keeping such an extraordinary measure under review. Will the Government be introducing, for example, a involved in the decision to order proper mediation for sunset clause and making provision for independent the Guantanamo detainees and having accepted that review of the Act’s operation by the independent they should be, effectively, paid a lot of money. When reviewer of terrorism legislation? we did that, part of the agreement was that we should Mr Cameron: That is a good question. We are not address this quite serious—relatively small, but planning a sunset clause for the simple reason that, as serious—gap in our legal proceedings, which is that if I said, you have a small number of cases where people someone makes a complaint against the Government who may want to do Britain harm are going to want and the security services, they really have no way of to sue our intelligence services. It may be an entirely defending themselves in a court process because to spurious claim, but you cannot prove it is a spurious defend themselves would mean producing intelligence and information that would basically make it 3 Closed material procedures cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 24 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP claim unless you produce the evidence. Given that this some sort of rather synthetic exercise that does not could be an ongoing problem and that it is a discrete really change anything. set of cases, I do not see the case for a sunset clause. Normally, you have a sunset clause if you are trying Q118 Chair: So if you don’t write the Equality to solve a problem, then the problem goes away and Impact Assessment until after you have finished the Bill falls. This could be an ongoing problem. revising the Bill and the policy, it has not served its In terms of how best Parliament can scrutinise this purpose? area of policy and practice, I am open to suggestions. Mr Cameron: Yes. What you need to demonstrate is Clearly, we have very effective Select Committees. I that, throughout the process of devising the policy, am sure they will want to look at this continually as you are thinking very carefully about equality. For it is, I hope, introduced and put into practice. I am instance, to take a real-life example, we instituted a convinced that when people see that it is not about pay freeze in the public sector. We were concerned turning current cases into untransparent cases—it is about how this would impact the low-paid. Many low- about making sure new cases are heard—they will see paid people in the public services are women, so we that it is not a problem. On the point about the were also concerned about the impact on women. That independent reviewer of terrorism, he is pretty free to is why we exempted people under a certain salary look at what he likes. from the freeze, and put in place a cash increase for those people. That was thinking about equality, Q116 Dr Francis: Could I now turn to your speech whereas if you had just introduced the policy at the to the CBI on 19 November? You said that the end, and gone tick, cross, tick, you wouldn’t have Government is, “Calling time on equality impact been. That is what you want in Whitehall: thinking assessments,” and will be shortening, or abandoning about equality all the way through, not just some sort altogether, some Government consultations. That is of exercise at the end. pretty strong language. Isn’t calling time on such impact assessments just a way of reducing the Q119 Mr Tyrie: You said a moment ago that David Government’s political accountability to Parliament? Anderson, the terrorism law watchdog, is pretty free Mr Cameron: No, I do not believe it is. This is a to look at whatever he wants. Did you know that he classic example of where the Whitehall machine, for asked to see the 27 cases that were listed in the Justice all its brilliance, slightly over-interpreted what and Security Green Paper, about which the Parliament intended. Parliament did not intend that an Government said: “We estimate that sensitive equality impact assessment had to be written for every information is central to 27 cases”? He asked to see single policy, but that is what was actually introduced. the papers for those, and that request was refused. Effectively, we found that Whitehall was producing a Mr Cameron: I didn’t know that. rather tick-box exercise for some policies, when what you really want is for policy makers and policy Q120 Mr Tyrie: Did you know that, finally, he got creators to think about equality all the way through to see three civil cases? You quoted him in support the process. If you have done that, you do not need the of your case a moment ago; of those three cases, he tick-box assessment at the end of the process. What I concluded, “I assume they were chosen for their was saying to the CBI is that we have looked again at ability clearly to illustrate the Government’s point of what the law actually requires, we have seen that we view.” Did you know that? are doing this in a very bureaucratic way and we are Mr Cameron: I didn’t know that. But why are we calling time on the assessments, because they are not doing this? I don’t want to waste the Government’s necessary in every case. We need to make sure that time or waste the House of Commons’ time. We are equality is properly looked at as we make policy. If doing this because we perceive, and I have been you need an impact assessment, produce one, but it advised, that there is a problem. We saw that problem should not be mandatory; in some cases, it had in the light of the Guantanamo detainees: you get a literally become an additional exercise that added no series of civil actions against the Government— value at all. sometimes they are serious accusations, but sometimes, as I say, they may be frivolous accusations Q117 Dr Francis: Could I hazard the opinion of my or ones meaning to do harm—and you can’t deal with Committee, then? My Committee really does feel that those cases through the existing process. The case they are extremely valuable and important in terms of doesn’t get to court: you settle before you even get to democratic accountability and engagement. Will you court, because you know you are not going to be able take account of the views of my Committee before to produce the evidence, because it is secret evidence you make any rash decisions? that would reveal your techniques and methods and Mr Cameron: I will certainly have a look at what all the rest of it. That is the problem; plus, we have your Committee has to say. Maybe we should share not even mentioned Norwich Pharmacal, which is with you some examples of where this was just the another problem. ticking of a box, rather than what you want, which is the serious consideration of whether something will Q121 Mr Tyrie: If we get a chance, we will come impact equality or not.4 That is what you want on to that. policy makers to be doing. In Government, you find Mr Cameron: It all links to the control principle, this a lot: all too often, you have form over substance. which I know you know is important: other countries It is the substance that matters, not putting in place share intelligence with us on the basis that that will 4 Ev 36 remain secret; if we can’t guarantee that, they won’t cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 25

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP give us intelligence. That is why this all matters, Barnes, who is a former Lord Chief Justice, Lord because, in the end, if other countries do not give us Mackay of Clashfern, etc.— intelligence, we may be less safe here in this country. Chair: Never mind the list; let us have the content. That is why I do not believe that, as Prime Minister, Mr Cameron: They are great, good, worthy people— I am wasting everyone’s time with this legislation. It even more worthy than the examples that Andrew is not something I came into politics to achieve, as it Tyrie gave us—and they say, very clearly: “We were. This is something that has been put on my desk. believe the Government is therefore right to extend I can see there is a problem for national security, and, the availability of CMPs to other civil courts. This having listened very carefully to the House of would ensure that the security and intelligence Commons and the House of Lords, which we are agencies can defend themselves against allegations doing, the responsible thing to do is to act. made against them.” As I say, this is being done after very careful consideration, and it is not just about Q122 Mr Tyrie: Would you agree that the special enabling the security services to defend themselves— advocates, who currently run secret courts—they are important as that is, and I am the Minister for the the lawyers specially charged to perform that function, security services and take that responsibility and there are 69 of them—have a particular expertise seriously—but we also want a situation where other in this forum? countries can give us secret intelligence that can be Mr Cameron: They have an expertise, clearly, for the kept secret. SIAC5 system, yes. Q126 Mr Tyrie: If we have time, we might come on Q123 Mr Tyrie: Did you know that what they said to that very last point. on this? You said a moment ago that you would not You made a remark earlier that was very closely get justice by the existing court system. related to the first part of your reply. You were saying, Mr Cameron: Well, we haven’t. There are actual basically, “We are doing this in order to get to justice. cases of that, where we have had, effectively, to pay Justice is not being done, because these cases are up for cases that we knew we had no prospect of being closed down.” That is your argument, isn’t it, defending in court. Prime Minister? Mr Cameron: Yes. Well, that is part of our Q124 Mr Tyrie: But we don’t know, and even David argument, yes. Anderson does not know whether any of these cases really were ones where the Government was in a Q127 Mr Tyrie: Lord Macdonald is the former DPP. vulnerable position or had a strong case, because he I do not think that anyone would describe him as a has not had an opportunity to see them. Let us just softie on terrorism matters. He says: “I have spent see what the special advocates have to say about it. many years in criminal courts watching evidence that They say that “there is as yet no example of a civil at first sight seemed persuasive, truthful and accurate claim involving national security that has proved disintegrating under cross-examination conducted untriable using PII and flexible and imaginative use upon the instructions of one of the parties…That is of ancillary procedures.” In other words, they are the risk that we are facing, that we are introducing”— saying that this can be achieved “without unacceptable this is your proposal, Prime Minister—“into civil disclosure of sensitive material”. justice—in the most sensitive and controversial cases, On a similar point—you have referred to Norwich where deeply serious allegations are made against the Pharmacal—the House of Lords Select Committee on Government and the security services—a process that the Constitution concluded that “there is no credible expels the claimant and gives him a form of justice risk that the judiciary of this country would order the that is not better than nothing. It is worse than nothing disclosure of secret intelligence material, wherever it because it may be justice that is based on entirely emanates from.” Indeed, there is no case— misleading evidence.” That is your DPP, Prime Mr Cameron: The point about this is no one is Minister. arguing that a judge is going to reveal sensitive Mr Cameron: Yes, but the point that I would make is evidence. The point is that the case will not come to that these cases are not taking over from an existing court in the first place, because the Government will set of cases. They are taking over from a set of cases not want to put secret evidence in front of an open that do not reach court at all. I would throw back the court. question to you in a way. If you were in my position, what would you do about the fact that we are having Q125 Mr Tyrie: Special advocates are flatly to pay out money often to quite unsavoury people, contradicting that. They are saying that we can use who might have made totally bogus allegations PII. They are saying so publicly. against Britain, and we have no method of hearing Mr Cameron: If you use PII, the evidence is these cases in court? PII can’t work, because PII is withdrawn from the court, rather than it going into the about excluding the evidence. If you do not have a court. You are quoting your experts. Let me quote a closed material proceeding, what do you do? letter to The Times, Wednesday 21 November, What we are prepared to do is say that these closed including Lord Faulks, Lord West, Lord Carlile of material proceedings only apply in civil cases. They Berriew, who is the former independent reviewer of would never in criminal cases and never apply in terrorism legislation, Baroness Neville-Jones, who inquests. They will only happen when the judge wants was National Security Minister, Lord Woolf of them to happen, not at the order of the Minister. All 5 Special Immigration Appeals Commission those safeguards will be in place. We have a cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 26 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP responsibility to sort this issue out. In doing so, we very single problem we are trying to deal with, and have the backing, as I have said, of the former Lord trying to deal with in the most sensitive way possible. Chief Justice, former Lord Chancellors and many Chair: We must move on to another problem; Mr others in the system who recognise that this is, as it Yeo. were, regrettable, but necessary. Q131 Mr Yeo: Chairman, I draw attention to my Q128 Mr Tyrie: The former Lord Chancellor, Lord entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Mackay, came out strongly against Norwich Prime Minister, your policy on gay marriage is Pharmacal, but that will get technical. admirably clear, and I am glad to say it has my full I will just pick up on one last point. You said that this support. What is not quite so admirably clear is the would be at the order of a judge and not of a Minister. energy policy, to which I would also like to give my If you look at the Bill that was introduced in the full support, if I was clear who actually speaks for the Lords, clause 6 clearly states that the court—that is, Government on energy policy. Even within the the judge—must, on the application of the Minister, Department of Energy itself, there are two, sometimes refer the case to a CMP. No judicial discretion was conflicting, ministerial voices, and the publication of provided for in the Bill; and that is why this Bill has the long-awaited and rather important Energy Bill was gone down in amendment after amendment in the apparently delayed for some time because of an House of Lords by majorities of over 100. irreconcilable difference between the Treasury and the Will you now tell us, and reassure us, that you are Department of Energy. actually going to do what you said just a moment ago Does your reported intervention to block the you preferred, which is restore discretion to the judge appointment of Dr David Kennedy as the permanent and make sure that that discretion rests there for him secretary at the Department of Energy—the candidate to decide, first, whether CMP should be granted, and, nominated by the Secretary of State—mean that you second, whether, rather than going down the CMP have decided that energy policy should now be route, he may first try to see if a settlement can be decided in the Treasury? obtained through PII? Mr Cameron: There is a lot in there, I must say. It is Mr Cameron: First, the Government introduced this an interesting segue from gay marriage to green Bill knowing it is a difficult and controversial issue. energy, but anyway. We didn’t do this thinking, “Well, this one will sail Chair: More clarity, I think, is what was meant. through the Lords and then sail through the Commons, Mr Cameron: First, let me make a general statement. and there won’t be any issues.” This is a very I think this Government has the most incredibly green controversial issue, but it deals with an important set of energy policies and I think we can be very, very national security issue that has to be dealt with. We proud of them. I think there are few countries in the always knew there was going to be lively debate— world that come anywhere close to what Britain has amendment; and we want to accept as many done and is proposing to do. amendments as possible without wrecking the central We are the first country in the world to set up a green purpose of the Bill, which is to allow these cases to investment bank and, at a time of fiscal hardship, put be heard. In terms of discretion, it will always be a £3 billion into it. We are the first country in the world judge who decides whether their use is appropriate— to introduce a proper renewable heat incentive into not Ministers. our system. We have set out a set of green energy payments so that any business, anywhere in the world, can come to Britain and, if they put their investment Q129 Chair: That sounds as though you have in place before 2017—that is five years from where accepted one of the Lords amendments. we are now—they will know what subsidy they will Mr Cameron: I don’t want to— get for 20 years out. That is why we have got the biggest offshore wind industry anywhere in the world. Q130 Mr Tyrie: Well, you have— The level of green investment in our country has Mr Cameron: No, I have said very carefully what I massively increased. The green economy is growing have said, but I don’t want to—Ken Clarke has got a by 3% a year compared with the rest of the economy, difficult enough job to do already without me trying which, sadly, isn’t growing at that speed. In terms of to convince his former adviser that he has got it right. Government’s own responsibility, we said we would Mr Tyrie: There are flat contradictions in clause 6. cut our energy use by 10%; we have cut it by 13%. I Mr Cameron: On the second point, which is the am incredibly proud of what we are doing right across amendment that specifically says you have to exhaust the green agenda and particularly in terms of energy. the PII route before the closed material proceedings, I Why has this taken some time? I tell you why it has am receiving advice about that, but I think that is taken some time: it’s difficult, because there is a very extremely difficult to accept, because I think that important balance you have to strike. How much are would block the system in a very, very bureaucratic we going to ask consumers to pay in terms of subsidy way. through their bills, and how much are we going to What you can say is that the Government has engaged offer as incentives to make sure Britain is leading this with the argument in a very constructive way, green energy, green tech, green jobs revolution? It accepting amendments where we can, accepting what took time to get that right, and I make absolutely no the Joint Committee says. There is no secret agenda apology for that. Government has to take time. If this here. I have no great desire to introduce a system of was a Conservative-only Government, we would secret justice. That is not what this is about. It is a probably be having discussions within the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 27

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Conservative party about what the right balance is. I have demonstrator projects and all the rest of it.” Until think we have now struck that balance. We have got we know about how commercially deliverable that a superb set of energy incentives that we can market technology is, we cannot truly tell how much gas is all over the world, and I will be leading that myself likely to be part of the energy mix. with a very talented team of energy Ministers. Sorry, there is a fourth point as well. As you know, On the specific issue of David Kennedy, it would be there is a gas revolution taking place across the world. wrong to talk about specific individuals and specific You see America becoming virtually self-sufficient in cases. Let me just say that, having settled the energy gas, and there is the opportunity of unconventional policy not just for this Parliament but, as I said, up to gas—shale gas—here in the UK. We do not know 2017 for specific payments and then the levy control exactly what is going to happen to gas prices, gas framework right out to 2020, the most important thing availability and the rest of it. I think it makes good we need now at the Department of Energy and sense to have set your subsidy regime for renewable Climate Change is commercial experience and the energy right out into the future, to have a very clear ability to do deals. I want to see wave upon wave of policy on nuclear and to get out and sell that as investment coming into Britain to build our nuclear aggressively as you can, but on gas to recognise, power stations, to invest in the North sea and to build “There is a revolution under way. I want us to be part green tech, green jobs and green investment. That is of that revolution.” When we know more about carbon what DECC has got to do. That is what all capture and storage, I think we will be in a better Government Departments have to do. I told the place to determine whether you can truly decarbonise Cabinet today, “Now we have got a determined energy your electricity supplies. policy, let us get out there and sell it to the rest of the world.” That is the priority. Q133 Mr Yeo: You will know that my Committee has been supporting exploitation of the shale gas Q132 Mr Yeo: Acknowledging the significant reserves for over a year and a half. I think the need improvements to the Energy Bill that have been made for the target has been reintroduced by the gas since it appeared in draft form, and entirely sharing strategy, which talks about the possibility of 37 GW your wish to see investment decisions brought of new gas-fired capacity. It is clear that if that was forward, there is still one area where there is concern. all built and run at a rate of more than 30%, we would Setting a target for emissions from electricity not even get to 100 grams per kWh, which is the upper generation has been put off until 2016, which is end of the range I suggested. So because the Treasury prolonging one element of uncertainty for some is advocating this gas strategy while you have got debt investors. Would it not be better to include even a which is still saying, “Let’s have an energy mix, range for an emissions target—perhaps of 50 to 100 which will help to reduce the interest—” grams per kWh—in secondary legislation now rather Mr Cameron: To be fair, everyone is saying, “Let’s than waiting for four years? Or, if you could not do have an energy mix.” This shouldn’t be seen as that, at least perhaps bring forward the date on which renewable versus gas, or nuclear versus renewable. It the target will be set to 2014, when the fourth carbon is all of them. We need to have renewable, nuclear budget, which was agreed last year, will be reviewed and gas. As I say, though, the key question that no and will, I trust, be confirmed. one can fully answer about gas is, if you knew how Mr Cameron: That is a very good question, and I well carbon capture and storage would go, then have spent some time thinking about this. There are actually how much gas you have wouldn’t really three points I would make. One is that I would matter, because it would not be contributing to carbon. challenge whether a decarbonisation target is really necessary to give industry the certainty it wants. What industry wants is the certainty about the payments that Q134 Mr Yeo: We cannot bet our policy on the will be received if you go ahead and build a wind assumption that CCS will be available, however. turbine or other such things, and we have done that. Obviously, we hope it will. That is the pounds, shillings and pence that businesses Mr Cameron: Those arguing for a firm know about. I think, in a way, the question rather decarbonisation target are betting that carbon capture gives away the answer. If you are saying, “Why not and storage is available. If not, you are in quite serious just have a range?”—if you want certainty, what good water, because you would be only relying on nuclear is a range? I do not think that argument really stacks and renewables. If carbon capture and storage didn’t up. come forward and you had a very tough carbon target, Secondly, I think there is a very good reason for not you would have no unabated gas at all. determining this now, which is that the idea of a decarbonisation target for 2030—2030 will be Q135 Mr Yeo: Well, there is another area that needs determined by the fifth carbon budget, which is not a bit more attention; that is on the demand side and fixed until 2016, so the right time to talk about it is the greater priority that should be attached to energy 2016. efficiency. In conclusion, would you now make a The third and final point is that decarbonisation targets speech that positively champions the economic only really make sense when you know what is going advantages as well as the environmental ones, and the to be possible in terms of carbon capture and storage. employment potential, of leading Britain towards a We are putting serious money into carbon capture and low-carbon future? A key part of that process will storage; again, I think we are leading the world on be making this the most energy-efficient economy in this in terms of saying, “Here are some funds. Let us the world. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 28 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Mr Cameron: I do support further steps on energy can you think of in the world where—I can tell you efficiency and the green deal is an enormous now how much money you will get for every commitment by the Government to help bring that investment you make up until 2017! This is an about. In most areas of policy, politicians are accused enormous incentive. That is why we have got the of making too many speeches and not actually doing biggest offshore wind market anywhere in the anything. I think in this area of policy, we’ve got the world—because actually we have said there is a very opposite problem. We have actually got, as I hope I clear framework. We know that we have to green our have described, a very aggressive, very progressive, electricity supplies. We know that we need a massive very forward-looking green energy policy. We now investment in green technology and that is taking need to get out there and sell it. The policy, I now place because of the big decisions that we have taken think, is fixed; it is now a question of getting out there about the overall framework. So I would reject the and advertising, not just domestically but idea that this is sort of, “Let’s just wait and see—let’s internationally, because there is an enormous hope for the best.” opportunity for green investment, green jobs and If you think about Government, we said we were green technology here in Britain. going to reduce our own energy consumption by 10% and we outperformed that in the first year. We then set Q136 Joan Walley: Prime Minister, you talked a whole paper of targets—what we were going to do earlier about it being substance that matters and not about paper usage, water usage, electricity usage and wanting to have anything that is superficial. Before all the rest of it, even flights. We said, “We have got the general election there was a very clear picture of to take our greenhouse gas emissions down 25% by you with the huskies and everything that you were 2015,” and we are on track to do that. We have cut going to do on climate change and so on, yet halfway the number of flights the Government are taking by through this Parliament, although we have just had 36%. There has been a 5% reduction in waste— some indication of your energy policy, when we have Chair: Thank you for not going to Oslo. seen how important it is that we get a clear picture, Mr Cameron: The Deputy Prime Minister went we do not seem to have the same clear picture of your instead, so we didn’t save a whole plane, but we made vision for the green economy as a whole. We have it a bit lighter, I suppose. seen this week the findings about the reduction in farmland birds and obviously the bees are in trouble, Q138 Joan Walley: The Deputy Prime Minister went so how is your vision being developed? to the Rio+20 conference, but he still has not yet been Mr Cameron: First, the Government have done a prepared to come back before the Environmental serious amount of work on this. I think we are the first Audit Committee to give a clear account not only of Government to produce a serious paper on the natural what happened, but of how it is being followed environment. As I have said, we have been very clear forward. So it seems that there is not a connection about what we are doing in terms of green energy. We between you and him on the way in which priority have the Green Investment Bank. If you look at the has been given to the green economy. results of where we are in terms of reducing our Mr Cameron: Well, I will take that on board, and carbon emissions, and in terms of the framework for perhaps he could come in front of your Committee. I further reductions, that is all in place. Carbon know that one of the points of this Committee is to emissions are down since 2010. We are on target to try and see what the involvement is of No. 10 and meet our renewable energy targets. We are on target what we are trying to do. Inevitably, when the focus to reach our carbon reduction targets, which were set is so much on debt, deficit, economy, growth and jobs, out in the Climate Change Act. I would argue the I actually see that there is a huge connection between vision is all there. This is a very green Government. those things and green technology, green investment We have been wrestling with huge problems of debt, and the rest of it, but I think that the Government have deficit, economic growth and all the rest of it. If the just been very focused on that. Meanwhile—after argument is about whether we should spend some some discussions, I accept—we have actually put in more time talking about this area, then, yes, I would place a very progressive set of green policies. We now accept that. need to demonstrate that they cohere and hold together, which I think they do. Q137 Joan Walley: I think the argument is, should not the Government be spending more time actually Q139 Joan Walley: But even the CBI says that the doing something about it? Back in August 2011, the Government’s current approach is missing the mark, Government published the “Enabling the Transition doesn’t it? That is particularly linked to the— to a Green Economy” document. That was a lengthy Mr Cameron: I think they might have said that before document, with many descriptions of what industry the Energy Bill was published. They very much could do, but with very little on how it would be welcomed the Energy Bill. They think that is a good— achieved. If we need incentives or targets, that needs to be right the way across Government and Q140 Joan Walley: But isn’t there an issue with the particularly in the Treasury. It just seems to us that Energy Bill, and just now with the autumn statement? your strategy really is just leaving it to the market to Yes, gas has to play some transitional role as we move determine the price of the green economy. towards the long-term carbon objectives and targets, Mr Cameron: I do not know how you can possibly but if we invest too much in gas now, we are moving say that the strategy is leaving it to the market when away from the truly sustainable path that we need to we have set out—as I have said, what other business be on. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 29

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Mr Cameron: I think we don’t know that yet. I think policy—sustained economic growth or protecting the that— environment? Mr Cameron: I think they go together. The whole Q141 Joan Walley: But how long can we wait? point about sustained economic growth is that it Mr Cameron: We don’t know how profound this gas should be sustained and sustainable. I would argue revolution is. As I have argued, I think this is a very that if you look at the worst examples of green Government, and I think we are fulfilling our environmental degradation, they normally happen in commitments. The debate I would have right now countries that actually aren’t growing. I will never with the some in the green movement is that some in forget going to East Germany when the wall was still the green movement really want us to rule out gas, there and seeing the effects of unsuccessful state- effectively, in a meaningful way. They want us to opt controlled economic policies without much growth right now for nuclear, plus renewables, plus energy but terrible environmental degradation. efficiency. Zip—that’s it. I think that would be a mistake. Q146 Miss McIntosh: Yet you and the Chancellor It may be that this gas revolution is really quite have both said that protecting the environment is a transformative and there is going to be a lot more gas, barrier to economic growth. and the price won’t be as expensive as some people Mr Cameron: I don’t think I quite put it like that, say. Now, that may be true; that may not be true. We actually. just don’t know. Even the expert committees cannot tell us for certain. But I think it would be a big risk Q147 Miss McIntosh: Well, will you confirm today to just ignore what is happening in the gas market, so that you have abandoned, or not abandoned, the the Government have a very sensible approach. We principle underlying the natural environment White have set out the subsidy regime for renewables and Paper that “natural environment is the foundation of we have set out the policy approach for nuclear, but sustained economic growth”? on gas we should have an open mind, and we should Mr Cameron: I am absolutely committed to that. As take part in fracking and unconventional gas, because I say, I don’t think there is a contradiction—we will this might be a revolution that we should be involved have to make sure that there isn’t a contradiction in. If we ignored it completely, we could be giving between healthy economic growth that provides our economy much higher energy prices than are wealth and jobs, and a healthy, sustainable otherwise necessary. environment. This is important, because America’s success in The argument we have been having in Government— unconventional gas is giving them very low energy and I think it is a good argument—comes back to this costs and actually cutting their carbon at the same issue about form over substance. I think sometimes time, because they are using gas rather than coal. They what we have found is that there are environmental are therefore seeing their country reindustrialise. restrictions placed on investment and growth that are When I think of constituencies such as Stoke-on-Trent definitely stopping the growth, but it is not absolutely North, which you represent, I want to make sure that clear that they are essential for protecting the we have a bigger manufacturing industry—that we are environment. For instance, when it comes to the involved in making, selling and exporting more planning system, the system has got very furred up by things. If we tie ourselves to unnecessarily expensive the huge numbers of statutory consultees and the energy policies, we would be making a mistake. I endless process of consultation. I don’t actually think think there is no contradiction in being green in terms this in every case is protecting the environment; it is of energy and wanting to encourage these energies of just stopping the development taking place. What you the future, but having an open mind on gas. need is a system that can move more rapidly.

Q142 Joan Walley: I hope that means, in terms of Q148 Miss McIntosh: So can you give an example the investment needed for the industrial and of Government Departments positively demonstrating manufacturing sector, that Stoke-on-Trent will be high the value of services in the environment, like payment on your agenda. for ecosystem services, that formulate their decisions? Mr Cameron: It is. I am the first Prime Minister to Mr Cameron: I can give you examples of go there since Mrs Thatcher. environmental policy driving growth. If you look at DECC you have got this subsidy regime for renewable Q143 Joan Walley: I shall wait to see the proof of energies; that is encouraging investment. That is the pudding. May I ask what regard you have to the clearly green and it is growth. But I can also give precautionary principle in taking forward the green you examples where projects are held up because of agenda? environmental processes or the EU habitats directive, Mr Cameron: What regard I have to the precautionary where the problem can be solved but it is put into the principle? I think that it should inform what we do, as “too difficult” box. has always been set out by Governments. There is the case of dredging Falmouth harbour, for instance. We actually now raise these things at Q144 Joan Walley: So you believe in that? Cabinet level, in order to try and get Departments to Mr Cameron: Yes, I do. bring up things that they are blocking and explain why they are blocking, and see whether we can find a way Q145 Miss McIntosh: Prime Minister, which do you through it. There are certain road, rail and building consider more important in setting Government projects that have been held up under environmental cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 30 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP legislation when, when you look at it, it is not really Mr Cameron: I suppose—I hope this is half an about environmental protection but about a sort of answer to the question—it seems to me that in the process that needs to be dealt with. We won’t be the past, flood alleviation schemes either went ahead or successful economy we need to be unless we get didn’t go ahead, depending on the decision of the through some of these processes a bit faster. EA6 and the money available. Under the partnership schemes that we have there is now an opportunity to Q149 Miss McIntosh: Let’s look at what you said involve charities, voluntary bodies, local authorities about the water sector. You said this year that and local communities, so that you can use some of investment in the water sector is the gold standard for the money and draw in other resources and other harnessing private capital in utilities and improving expertise in order that flood alleviation work goes infrastructure. Yet when the Government published ahead. So I am hoping that we will get more bang for the draft Water Bill there was precious little clarity on our buck. upstream competition, or even resilience, which was there as a plain as a pikestaff in the White Paper. Huge Q152 Miss McIntosh: When do you think we will discretion is given to the regulator which, in one view, know what the reservoir safety guidance is to allow is placing the industry’s reputation as a safe haven for these schemes to go ahead? investment at risk. Mr Cameron: I think you’ve what’s known as got me 7 Mr Cameron: That is a very good question. I think at with that one. I will have to get back to you on that. the moment you are carrying out the pre-legislative scrutiny of this Bill. First, let’s rewind a bit. I think Q153 Andrew Miller: You told me previously, Prime the water industry is a great example of a utility Minister, that you need to spend more time with your which, because it was privatised, we were able to get science advisers. You have just explained to us that massive investment into it. It is something like £108 these questions posed by my three colleagues are billion of investment. If that had been queuing up difficult balances to strike. I could not agree with you behind the NHS, pensions and schools and everything more. You talk also about targets that have been else, it never would have had that investment. That is established in a number of areas. I take it that these a very successful model and I don’t want to do targets are based upon the balance between the anything to disadvantage it. political realities and the scientific advice you have received. Is that right? The point of the Water Bill is to encourage further Mr Cameron: Scientific advice is fed into investment into the water industry, so we will look Government policy at the appropriate time. Every very carefully at what your Committee has to say. I Government Department now has a scientific adviser. think there is a basic difficulty about this. If you want I encourage them to get stuck into the policy-making everything written into the Water Bill about what a process. I think on occasion that has had very good more open market could look like in water and greater effect. Sometimes, frankly, I think we need to do choice for businesses and charities and so on, if you more. You don’t necessarily have to meet with your try to write down what a market looks like, you can scientific adviser in order to get their advice. In the get yourself into quite a lot of trouble, because the modern world, with e-mail and everything else, they point is that you want this market to develop. But I are able to feed in their advice in other ways. am very alert to the problems you mention, particularly the problem of doing anything that might Q154 Andrew Miller: But you did tell me you were put off investment. going to meet with them more frequently, but there you are. Q150 Miss McIntosh: Would you not accept that it Mr Cameron: Yesterday I went to Cambridge to was possibly a good reason to delay, for example, a announce this £100 million Government investment massive housing development on a greenfield site into helping to make us the leaders in sequencing going ahead if water companies said that they could DNA and making sure that we have a huge DNA not safely take the foul water away in times of a high databank that can give us a big advantage. That all water table and saturated farmland, so it would back came from a session with the Government scientists. up into people’s homes? That has happened twice in They made the point that the NHS is a unique North Yorkshire this year. institution because it is national; if you want to Mr Cameron: Of course, I think there have been leverage the benefit of that you need to invest in this occasions when buildings have gone ahead on DNA work. So what I am trying to say is that the floodplains without proper measures being put in views of the scientists are directly feeding into some place. We can all think of examples of that. My point very big investment decisions by the Government. is not that you shouldn’t take into account environmental consequences when making planning Q155 Andrew Miller: But specifically on the topic decisions—you should—but we’ve got to find a way of green government, we have seen a number of of making this process go at some reasonable speed. policy shifts, on forests, on badgers, on buzzards, on renewable obligation banding review and so on. Let Q151 Miss McIntosh: If you look at the me just pick out one of them. I have spoken about it Government’s climate adaptation policies, how can in the House. On the question of badgers, there has we make the best use of the experts, the charities, been a long study conducted by an eminent group of industry, farmers in pooling their expertise and their 6 Environment Agency resources in building flood alleviation schemes? 7 Ev 36 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 31

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP people led by my opposite number in the Lords, morning—that it would be virtually impossible to Professor John Krebs, Lord Krebs. He is saying that continue that kind of hugely important work, which the Government’s current position is crazy and argues underpins some of the work of my colleagues’ in favour of a policy that is based upon vaccine and Committees, without ensuring that the data is bio-security measures. Why have you adopted an protected in the future, and that the collection of the opposite policy to that? data continues. Will you look carefully to ensure that Mr Cameron: In the end, we have listened to the the collection of systematic data, which underpins scientific evidence and we have looked at the evidence important research, continues? from overseas and the trials carried out in the UK and Mr Cameron: I know that it is a controversial made a decision. I would argue that it is a decision decision, what we have said about the census. I am firmly based on the scientific evidence. sure that Francis Maude, who has departmental The randomised badger culling trial, we believe, responsibility for this, will look carefully at your demonstrated that if you culled over an area of 150 sq report and what the RAC says. Perhaps I should not km, that could lead to a 16% reduction in TB incidents give an off-the-cuff response, but so much data is in the local area. I do want to be partisan about this, available about household information, car use and all but when the previous Government were in office I the rest of it, and it is so much cheaper to collect and felt that it was not about the science; Ministers could monitor that, that I would be surprised if it really was not make a decision on this because it would mean impossible to know about the movements of people, confronting difficult lobbies and taking a difficult cars, population densities and all the rest of it— decision. When you look around the world, as far as I can see, all those countries that have TB in cattle Andrew Miller: Well— either have strict cattle movements or are involved in Mr Cameron: But who am I to know? I will look at some element of culling parts of wildlife that pass TB your report. to the cattle. In France it is wild boar, in Australia it is possums—I have got a list somewhere. The point Q159 Andrew Miller: Finally, on to an area where is, we have looked at the science, we have looked at perhaps we can agree. A lot of work has happened the evidence and we are prepared to take a difficult since the outbreak of Chalara fraxinea was identified, decision. some of which leads to many questions on what The reason why there was a change this year was that happened in the past, but we all agree that the prime a new problem came along, which was a logistical objective is to address the challenge and to stop the problem. Were you going to be able to complete this spread of the condition if at all possible. properly before late autumn and winter set in? The Mr Cameron: Are we on— people contracted to carry it out said that they could Andrew Miller: Ash dieback not. It was an NFU decision, which we accepted, so Mr Cameron: I just wanted to check in case it was it was put off to next year. As far as I am concerned, some— it is a very difficult decision, and I know that it is Andrew Miller: I beg your pardon—sorry, you drift deeply unpopular with many people because of their into this. One aspect of data collection here is better views on badgers and the rest of it, but as Prime engagement with the public. The idea of citizen Minister, I feel that we have to take action to deal science is not new, but this is an area where members with a serious problem; 26,000 cattle were destroyed of the public can collect hugely valuable data. Will last year, and this could go into billions of pounds if you make sure that that kind of work being undertaken we do not deal with it. by organisations—supported by the Forestry Commission and the various key forest bodies, Kew Q156 Andrew Miller: Of course, it is a very Gardens and so on—is properly resourced? If we do serious problem. not resource that kind of data collection, we are not Mr Cameron: That is why I think, having looked at going to understand fully the management of the the science, we have made the right decision. spread of this disease. Mr Cameron: I will look very carefully at that. My Q157 Andrew Miller: But nevertheless, it is understanding is that there has been a lot of activity described as crazy by the lead expert in this field. sponsored by DEFRA to map how far ash dieback has Mr Cameron: By an expert. There are other scientists got and how serious it is. There is also this question, who say that we are following the science. The NFU believe that this is absolutely the right policy. as I am frustrated that this disease was clearly sweeping across Europe: was there more we could have done earlier? I think we need really to examine Q158 Andrew Miller: Okay, well let us get to an area where we can reach some agreement. The RAC whether everything that could have been done was Foundation recently published a very good report on done, but I will certainly look at the point you make. modelling future transport needs, which is incredibly important. A lot of the work that underpins that Q160 Andrew Miller: We need fully to understand requires accurate understanding of what is happening that many of these issues, such as bovine TB and to the human population, where we are living and so zoonotic conditions like that— on, and information is currently collected through the Mr Cameron: With ash dieback specifically, I can census machinery. The Government are due to totally see that you are never going to map it respond to the report we made on the future of the effectively unless you involve an enormous number of census, and the RAC Foundation told me—just this voluntary bodies, charities— cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 32 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Q161 Andrew Miller: No. Finally, we need to work There is a slight difference between the two: one is a collaboratively not just with European colleagues but new institution to put in seedcorn finance to get green globally to understand fully where diseases come investments going; the other one is a massive Treasury from. We are told that ash dieback originated probably scheme to try to back investments that ought to be in Japan or Korea, not in Poland, as our newspapers taking place but, in this rather fragile financial have suggested. Will you work collaboratively environment, are not because they need some form through the international bodies to make sure we get of guarantee. a better understanding of disease management in both plant and animal health? Q163 Mr Bailey: With respect, Prime Minister, I do Mr Cameron: Yes. not think that you have fully explained why it should Chair: We need to move on, but it strikes me that it not have the right to borrow on the private market to would be a rather nice memorial to Patrick Moore if do that. we were to encourage citizen scientists. Mr Cameron: I think it will in time. The point is that Andrew Miller: He was on my side on badgers, by the Government must have an overall regard for the the way. level of borrowing in the economy, so if you create a new institution that builds up debt, that will affect Q162 Mr Bailey: Prime Minister, earlier on you cited your deficit and debt position. My argument is that the Green Investment Bank as a demonstration of your right now, the need for the Green Investment Bank to Government’s commitment to greening the economy. borrow is not really there, because it has the finance, It was launched in November, but cannot borrow to the ability to go out and do deals, and the ability to leverage in private sector debt and that is what is most support its investments until Government debt as a needed. If it did not have any money— percentage of GDP is falling. On the other hand, there have been other Government schemes, including the Infrastructure (Financial Assistance) Act 2012, which Q164 Mr Bailey: May I just quote to you the Green Investment Bank’s chief investment officer at the allows the Government to provide financial launch? He reported that there was a worsening slump guarantees—in the latter case, up to £50 billion— in the long-term finance market, particularly in right away. offshore wind and waste. Other banks are moving out. Can you demonstrate your commitment to a green He said, “Our planning assumption is that that’s a economy by evening things up? It would seem rather permanent structural shift. It’s a huge challenge.” illogical, in view of the Government’s commitment to Given the strategic importance in offshore wind, and the green economy, to allow guarantees for you have quoted its role and Britain’s position in the infrastructure but not for green infrastructure. world in developing it, you have the existing financial Mr Cameron: That is a very good question. I think markets not providing for it. Surely it should be the that there is a difference between the Green role of the Green Investment Bank to do so, and yet Investment Bank and the infrastructure guarantees. without that ability to borrow on the private market, First, I am glad that the Green Investment Bank is up it is handicapped in doing so. and running relatively quickly. These things do take Mr Cameron: I hesitate to challenge the person you time to set up: you have to have all the state aids and quote. I was recently in Abu Dhabi with a whole everything else in place. Because it has got £3 billion series of major investors from the UAE. They were in its bank account, it does not need to borrow to all extremely keen to invest in offshore wind because start with. they can now see that the subsidy regime has been I would argue—I think I am right in this—that the set. I would challenge the idea that there is not the problem right now is not the shortage of borrowing availability of long-term finance for these projects. I available for green projects; it is actually the shortage think that there is, and the figures for what has of equity finance. The seedcorn money needs to go in happened in terms of investment in renewable energy to make some of these schemes attractive, and then would back me up. We are on track to double our you can lever in private sector or other money. I think renewable electricity capacity from 8 GW at the end it is good that the £3 billion is there. I do not think of 2009 to 16 GW by the end of 2012. Between April that the fact that it cannot borrow is essential in the 2011 and July 2012, renewable industry early years. announcements totalled around £12.7 billion. I do not That is different from the infrastructure guarantees, think that there is either a shortage of investment where, basically, what the Treasury is doing— coming in or a shortage of available loan finance, but something that people have asked the Treasury to do I can go and check. It seems that the Green Investment for decades, probably centuries, and it has always Bank can play a role. Because it is a quasi- refused to do until this Government—is say, “Look, if Government institution, it has the money in its kitty there is an investment project that is basically ready to go in and help make these deals happen. to go, but because of financial uncertainty and all the problems in the world that we know about, it needs Q165 Mr Bailey: Given the contradiction in the evidence that I have and what you tell me, I would be an infrastructure guarantee, the Treasury is in some 8 circumstances prepared to give that guarantee.” Of grateful for further clarification. course, it could give that guarantee as well not just to Finally, on something entirely different, you quoted the green deal. This is a report back from a company roads and railways but maybe to a green investment in my constituency. The implementation of it has been project, so there is no restriction on Treasury guarantees being given to green projects. 8 Ev 36 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 33

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP delayed twice. It was launched in October and, as of will, on occasion, have to build on greenfield sites and November, no assessments have been made and the we will have to see planning permissions go ahead. I funding is supposed to be finalised in January. There think that was the correct thing to say and we have to is a prevailing climate of doubt and uncertainty among be honest about that. the small businesses that will have to deliver it. Given the fact that they have to recruit, train and accredit Q169 Mr Betts: You referred earlier to the planning people in order to deliver it, they are loth to do so in system being furred up. The Chancellor and others the current climate of uncertainty. Can you give have said that it is an obstacle to growth. I might absolute guarantees that this will go ahead in January disagree with that, but the intention of the Growth and and that the funding regime will be there, and will Infrastructure Bill is to remove those obstacles and get you clarify as a matter of urgency which schemes will more planning applications approved, and therefore to qualify for finance? allow more development to go ahead and to build on Mr Cameron: What I would say—it is a good the sort of amounts of land that the Planning Minister question—is that the funding is there. The plans for referred to. Or are you saying that there is a problem launch, progressively through 2013, are there. We of a certain scale, but you do not intend to build on have just announced £125 million of incentives for enough land to solve the problem? people taking up the new deal from January, which is Mr Cameron: No, he was making the point that there a £1,000 cashback for making your home more energy is a problem that has to be dealt with: we are not efficient. It is a big scheme, so it is a big challenge to building enough houses. It is absolutely clear that we get it right. In terms of the role of No. 10, the Deputy are not building enough houses. Housing starts are up Prime Minister and I have asked for presentations since 2009, so that is good, but we need to build more from energy and climate change Ministers to see how houses. Let me be absolutely clear: we do not have a the plans are going. We have subjected the matter to target for the percentage of land that needs to be built external challenge. It is challenging getting people to on. What we are trying to do is twofold. First, we are look at energy improvements for their own home. It trying to clean up and simplify the planning system, is an extraordinary thing. Even sometimes when you so we have taken the national policy planning can prove to people that they will save money on their framework from 1,000 pages down to 50 because we energy bill, there is a hesitation. We have to find ways want a simpler system. We are also trying to localise of getting over that hesitation. We are very committed. the decision making far more, because the idea is that communities should be able to design their own Q166 Mr Bailey: Will there be a public information neighbourhood plans. campaign? How do you really deal with this problem? When you Mr Cameron: Yes, there must be. talk to people in villages and towns, they say, “On the one hand we want more homes for local people to live Q167 Mr Bailey: And when will it be? in, but on the other hand we are very worried about Mr Cameron: A very good question. I will have to get over-development in the area.” How do you solve that back to you on that.9 Basically, it is set for next year. problem? Our answer is that you solve the problem by taking the decision making down to the Q168 Mr Betts: On 28 November on “Newsnight”, neighbourhood and giving neighbourhoods greater Nick Boles, the Planning Minister, said that it would ability to determine how many houses, of what sort be necessary to build around 3% extra on unbuilt land and for whom. in this country in order to solve the housing problem. I get this representing a rural constituency. If people That is an area of land about twice the size of Greater felt that there would be 10 or 20 extra houses in the London. Was the Minister on that occasion expressing village and they would have a real say over where something he thought might happen or would like to they are, they might go for that. The fear is that an happen, or was it a clear expression of Government enormous housing estate is going to land, as if from policy that to solve the housing crisis, that amount of Mars, and people do not really have any choice land will now need to be built on? about it. Mr Cameron: I think the Planning Minister was trying to give an exemplification of the scale of the Q170 Mr Betts: But in reply to Anne McIntosh problem. Let me be absolutely clear: it is not earlier when you talked about the planning system Government policy to set a target for the percentage being furred up, you said that the problem was the of land that needs to be built on. That 3% is not going number of statutory consultees and the amount of to form a target—that is absolutely not the case. I consultation. Is Government policy really that there is missed the beginning of “Newsnight”, I’m afraid to too much consultation in the planning system, and that say, but I watched some of it, and Nick Boles was— all the local people who want a real say about what rather effectively, I thought—making the point that, happens in their area should have less say in the yes, we all want to see fewer empty homes, we all future? want to see more building on brownfield land and we Mr Cameron: No, no, that’s— all want to see the effective conversion of buildings Mr Betts: Those were the words you used. that do not have other uses into dwellings, but that is Mr Cameron: Very good; you ought to be a barrister. not enough. He was making an honest and honourable The point I am making is that there is an enormous point that if we want to build more houses in amount of form here, rather than substance. Of course Britain—we have a massive housing shortage—we people have got to be consulted about planning. Our 9 Ev 37 argument is that it should go down to the cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 34 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP neighbourhood level. People should have a far greater Q174 Sir Malcolm Bruce: Prime Minister, you are real impact. At the moment, we have a lot of rather co-chair of the high-level panel on the post-2015 phoney consultation. You must know, Clive, from development agenda. The first full meeting has taken your long experience in politics, that there is a lot of place in London; I think that the next one is in consultation in which papers are issued and views are Indonesia. sought, but that is not really what it is about. Mr Cameron: The next one is in Monrovia, actually. Sir Malcolm Bruce: Oh, it’s in Monrovia—right. The Q171 Mr Betts: I think this is a real problem for any one after that must be in Indonesia. Government, and I support the localist intention and The point is that you have said that you think that the direction, but what happens when we have local plans objective we should be looking for post 2015 is the across the country that reflect local views about elimination of absolute poverty. Can I clarify that you whether houses should be built or whether there do take that view? should be onshore wind farms, and the Government Mr Cameron: Yes. have national requirements to meet climate change targets—presumably onshore wind is still an Q175 Sir Malcolm Bruce: First, do you think you important part of that—and need to see houses built will be able to persuade other members of the panel to meet requirements there? What is the Government’s of that? Can you both define what you mean by the policy and approach to ensure that when you look at abolition of absolute poverty and say when it might the local plans collectively across the country, they be achieved, given that at the moment we talk about add up to sufficient development to meet the national a dollar and a quarter or a dollar and a half? Clearly housing targets and the national climate change it needs to be more than that, and clearly it needs to targets? be more than about just money if it means what it Mr Cameron: That is a very good question. I would means. Poverty isn’t just about money; it’s actually turn the argument completely the other way around. having access as well. There was a time when we had national housing Mr Cameron: First of all, I think that the strength of targets, regional plans and all this top-down the MDGs10 was that they were relatively simple, infrastructure. Did we build the houses we needed? straightforward, measurable things that people could No, we did not, because actually there was no get a hold of, and the idea of halving—as they did— incentive for local— the number of people whose income was less than a dollar a day was something that you could check up Q172 Mr Betts: We built a few more than we are and ask, “Well, how have we done?” Actually, the building now, actually. great thing is that that has been achieved before 2015. Mr Cameron: By the end of your party’s Government, So the idea of trying to eliminate absolute poverty in we were hardly building any houses at all. In my a generation is something that I think is achievable. constituency in west Oxfordshire, which I would Under the last set of goals, we made a big step argue is one of the most beautiful environments in the towards it. I would argue that, for this particular goal, whole country, we are actually building more houses you probably do need to stick to a monetary target, at the moment than required under the old top-down because otherwise it will be rather difficult to plan, because we have a very good local authority that measure. And while, of course, this is all imperfect, consults local people, makes the most of exception the measure of $1.25 a day is now the accepted sites and all the rest of it. It can be done. I just happen measure of what is sort of the absolute poverty line. to believe that we are more likely to build the houses This is not the only thing we are hoping to achieve if we have a simplified national system and more local with this high-level panel. When Ban Ki-moon asked decision making, rather than what we had, which was us to do is this, he said, “Look, here we are, we’re a very top-down system. nearly at 2015. Here are the millennium development On the issue of onshore wind, I do think that we need goals. What should the task be for the world in the to have a system where we look at more community period after 2015? How are we going to challenge benefit. That is what we are consulting on at the ourselves to do something as great as the millennium moment because I think, again, that if communities development goals?” Being a practical person, my can see there is actually a benefit for them, you have approach is to say, “Well, let’s first of all have an a better chance of people saying, “Well, I’m happy for exciting goal that everyone can get behind”—I think this to go ahead.” that’s eradicating extreme poverty in a generation, which I think can be done. But then let’s take the millennium development goals and ask a pretty simple Q173 Mr Betts: And yet the Growth and question: what do we want to keep, what do we want Infrastructure Bill potentially takes those very powers to change and what do we want to add? That should away from the local council that can be influenced by be the real work of this high-level panel—to try to the local community, and transfers them to the come up with something simple and inspiring for the Planning Inspectorate in certain circumstances. next period to say, “Right, here are the things that we Mr Cameron: There are national requirements in want to try and do to tackle extreme poverty in our planning; we have to make sure that we build power world and improve development and life chances.” stations and big infrastructure, of course. But, in terms of housing, as I said, I think that neighbourhood plans Q176 Sir Malcolm Bruce: Obviously, it is dramatic will enable communities to feel much more content that you’re saying that we can effectively make that expansion can go ahead in a way that they feel comfortable with, but time will tell. 10 Millennium Development Goals cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 35

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP history poverty within a generation, but you have also do about it. May I just point to something said by highlighted the importance of what you call the Professor Lawrence Haddad, who is the head of “golden thread” of governance-related issues. You international development studies at Sussex have actually defined them differently on different University? He says that he thinks your golden thread occasions, I notice. On one occasion it was “access to has real merit, but he suggests that it would be markets, property rights, private sector investment”, improved if you also included empowerment, fairness and in New York in March 2012, it was “stable and collectivity. He argues that if you put those government, lack of corruption, human rights, the rule together, it would be a much more balanced of law, transparent information”. framework. I think it is important from your point of Mr Cameron: But they are the same sort of things. You’re making a good point— view, if the golden thread is going to be the Cameron legacy, that it does actually have that broad basis of Q177 Sir Malcolm Bruce: The point is that people support. are saying that they are fine, in themselves, but they Mr Cameron: I think that that is a very fair point. The are rather selective. Indeed, some people are guru I am particularly influenced by is Paul Collier, suggesting—and I don’t think that is the intention— who wrote The Bottom Billion and very good books that if they are not ideological, they kind of lean in about tackling poverty in Africa, really focusing on one direction. Do you accept that there is maybe scope the problems of conflict, corruption and injustice. I for defining them, and indeed possibly improving will look very carefully at what you say, but I also them in order to get real support? think that this is good because this is an agenda that Mr Cameron: Yes, I am sure there is. I would reject is not just rich countries talking to poor countries. the idea that this is ideological— This is an agenda that we should be involved in, too. Sir Malcolm Bruce: I didn’t say it was, but some If we have proper transparency in tax and proper people are suggesting that. transparency in extractive industries, we have to get Mr Cameron: I will take the opportunity to reject it our own house in order as well as asking countries anyway, on the basis that if we look at poverty in our and Governments in the poorest parts of the world to world, we have clearly got some countries that are do the same. So it is right it involves us and them. It being very effective in taking people out of poverty is not just about money, and also to all those taxpayers as their economy grows, but we’ve got some countries who wonder, “Are we right to meet our goals in terms where we’ve got really entrenched poverty and where of aid?”, which I believe we are, I think it not much progress is being made, and my argument would be that that is because of a complete lack of a demonstrates that we recognise this is not just about golden thread. There is war, corruption, corrupt money. You will never, as a country, succeed unless government, no existence of markets, no ability to you deal with the problems of conflict, injustice and have any right of ownership of anything, no ability to rights. get your produce to market and no ability to improve your life. I think there is a golden thread that links Q179 Sir Malcolm Bruce: So when the work of the all those things: the absence of war, the absence of high-level panel is complete, will you, David corruption, the presence of the rule of law, decent Cameron, continue to champion that cause? government and markets that work. Those things, Mr Cameron: Yes, I hope that we are going to be able which we take for granted here, by and large, just to come up with something that is simple, sellable and simply don’t exist in some of these countries, so it that can inspire people. The easiest thing in the world seems to me that when we write the next set of is to sit on one of these UN panels, take the millennium development goals, or whatever we are going to call them, if we just look at absolute poverty, millennium development goals and then produce the number of people in school, maternal health— something incredibly complicated. Frankly, I think these very, very important things—we are missing a that is the danger, because everyone wants to add big part of the picture, which is those things that really something into this process—more on the help countries and people to go from poverty to environment, more on sustainability or more on wealth. education. You can think of a million things to add. When you ask people in some of the poorest We’ve got to try and find a way of describing a simple countries, “What do you most want in the world?”, set of things. you are expecting to hear, and you often hear, “A meal; a job,” but you also hear, “I want some justice. Q180 Sir Malcolm Bruce: Most people can’t I want an end to this corruption I am having to deal remember eight. Don’t add more. with.” People feel that very, very strongly, and I think Mr Cameron: Well, exactly. That’s the challenge, but we will fail unless we try and reflect some of that in the work we do. that will be tough. Chair: Prime Minister, thank you very much. We Q178 Sir Malcolm Bruce: The point that people are think there are issues coming up that would make it making is that you are describing a situation when you worth getting you to come in early in the new year. have achieved the right scenario, but not everybody Before I close the meeting, I would just like to place started in that situation. If you are a poor person living on record that this is the last meeting at which Kevin in a country that doesn’t have any of those things, for Candy, a member of our team, will be assisting us. He it to be meaningful, you have to say what we should has done a great deal of the organisation for these cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Ev 36 Liaison Committee: Evidence

11 December 2012 Rt Hon David Cameron MP sessions, so we would like to thank him for all his Chair: And thank you, Prime Minister. work for the Committee. Mr Cameron: Thank you very much. Mr Cameron: Thank you.

Letter to the Chair of the Committee from the Prime Minister, dated 8 January 2013 I said that I would write on a number of issues raised with me during my appearance at the Liaison Committee on 11 December.

Q104 The Rehabilitation Revolution You asked if there was going to be a White Paper or a Green Paper. Chris Grayling will be publishing a consultation paper in the near future which sets out proposals to deliver a rehabilitation revolution. I have asked that he write to you with further details.

Q117 Equality Impact Assessments I offered to provide Hywel Francis with some examples of what I mean by “box-ticking” when it comes to Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs). As I said in my November speech to the CBI, EIAs are not a legal requirement and are not needed if equality has been properly considered in the first place. First, case law has shown that doing an EIA does not protect an authority from a successful legal challenge. For example, Birmingham City Council lost a case despite having done an EIA, because the EIA was not seen in time by the decision-makers and did not address the issues properly. Second, government departments and other public bodies have, in the past, produced disproportionately long or unnecessary EIAs. Is there really a pressing need, for example, for the Forestry Commission to do an Equality Impact Assessment on its plans for forestry, having concluded that everyone benefits from forests? And is it really necessary for HSE to report that there are no equality impact issues when reporting on putting an interactive CD on a website about the management of legionella in hot and cold water systems in care settings? Is it enough just to make sure that the system is accessible in the first place? Or, having already published EIAs on the topic, was it then necessary for DECC to publish another 17 pages of EIA on its plans for a temporary halt to new applications to the Warm Front scheme? These are the issues I want us to address. I want policy makers and people delivering public services to be thinking about equality throughout the process and keeping a simple audit trail, not producing volumes of tick- box paperwork at the end with no real value. This is not a change in policy—our approach was set out in the Equality Strategy and the Government Equalities Office has been working with departments to help them consider equality more effectively. And as you know, we have established a review of the public sector equality duty to see if it is operating as intended and I expect the review will address this issue.

Q152 Reservoir Safety Guidance Anne McIntosh asked about the timing of publication of guidance on reservoir safety. DEFRA is working with the Institution of Civil Engineers working group which intends to publish its guidance to the Reservoirs Safety Act in April 2013.

Q164 Green Investment Bank Adrian Bailey asked about the Green Investment Bank and whether there was either a shortage of investment coming in or a shortage of available loan finance to invest in green initiatives. We are committed to setting the UK firmly on course towards a green and growing economy. The Green Investment Bank is a key component of our transition to a green and growing economy and complements other green policies to help accelerate additional capital in green infrastructure. With £3 billion to 2015, the Green Investment Bank is being amply funded so that it will not need to borrow in the short to medium term. The level of funding for it after 2014–15 will be determined at the next spending review. The Bank is now fully operational and is already managing investments. Both the offshore wind sector and the waste sector are key priorities for the Bank, and we fully expect it to make a real impact in mobilising additional commercial investment into these sectors. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [25-03-2013 17:51] Job: 025839 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/025839/025839_w001_steve_Supplementary written evidence from the Prime Minister.xml

Liaison Committee: Evidence Ev 37

Q167 Timing of a Publicity Campaign for the Green Deal Adrian Bailey also asked for information regarding a public information campaign for the Green Deal. DECC has been granted an exemption to the Government marketing freeze for a public campaign that will build understanding and trust of the Green Deal. An initial £2.9 million is available for a new communications campaign to cover digital and traditional channels from January to approximately April. I am copying this letter to Hywel Francis, Anne McIntosh and Adrian Bailey. 8 January 2013

Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited 03/2013 025839 19585 Distributed by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from:

Online www.tsoshop.co.uk

Mail, Telephone, Fax & E-mail TSO PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN General enquiries 0870 600 5522 Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-call 0845 7 023474 Fax orders: 0870 600 5533 Email: [email protected] Textphone: 0870 240 3701

The Houses of Parliament Shop 12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square London SW1A 2JX Telephone orders: 020 7219 3890/General enquiries: 020 7219 3890 Fax orders: 020 7219 3866 Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.shop.parliament.uk TSO@Blackwell and other Accredited Agents

© Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2013 PEFC/16-33-622 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/