Environmental Audit Committee
Wednesday 8th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 months, 1 week ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
15:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Order. Order!Well, welcome, everybody, to the special session of the Environmental Audit Committee, where I'm pleased to say we will be, um, following up on the session that we had a few weeks ago on the National Security Assessment on Biodiversity Loss. Um we are following that, invited um ministers from the Department for the environment, uh, from the Cabinet Office and the Foreign Office to join us. One out of three, I wouldn't say isn't bad, but it's what we've got. Anyway, we're delighted to have Minister Mary Craig.
Thank you very much for, for coming along. Um, and also, uh, to have, uh, Ross Eales, uh, here from, the foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Um, and also to, uh, senior um figures from department from the environment who are, will encourage to introduce themselves. So thank you very much, all of you for joining us. So, um, if I could start by just asking you to introduce yourself, uh, and, and of course, um, any involvement that you had, uh, in the pulling together of the national security assessment.
If we can start with yourself, please, Mr. Edward.
Thank you very much for, for coming along. Um, and also, uh, to have, uh, Ross Eales, uh, here from, the foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Um, and also to, uh, senior um figures from department from the environment who are, will encourage to introduce themselves. So thank you very much, all of you for joining us. So, um, if I could start by just asking you to introduce yourself, uh, and, and of course, um, any involvement that you had, uh, in the pulling together of the national security assessment.
If we can start with yourself, please, Mr. Edward.
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:33
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, first of all, thanks, chair, for agreeing to the slightly later start time we've been, um, uh, having. A bit of a pre eek workout in Committee room ten next door, which I can tell you is considerably hotter than this committee room. So I'm grateful to the committee for the slightly later start. Um, this is a document. It's a cross-government strategic assessment developed by analysts and subject matter experts across government. Um, it was published in January of this year.
Basically, um, brings together the scientific evidence, the policy analysis and national security expertise to inform our long term resilience and security planning.
Basically, um, brings together the scientific evidence, the policy analysis and national security expertise to inform our long term resilience and security planning.
15:34
15:34
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, it was a cross-government document, um, developed by analysts from across the government. Um and um you can see from its title who might have been involved, but it's not produced by a single department. It was about bringing together that scientific evidence, policy analysis and national security expertise to, to look at resilience and planning.
15:34
15:34
15:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Okay. Well, thank you for that. Now we we obviously, as I mentioned, asked, um, the Cabinet Office to appear today, um, which they declined to do, but we would on the basis that they were responsible for collective government and coordination of policy, as well as supporting the National Security Council. Now, they told us that, um, the security assessment is a Defra publication and sort of denied ownership of it. Is, is that how you sort of see it?You you see it as a Defra publication.
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:38
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
You had no idea whether you wanted it to mainly inform government or mainly inform the general public. I mean, I think it is important that we understand whether this was something that was designed to inform government or whether this is something that was designed to, to ensure the public were better informed and that, you know, that Genesis is important. It's not it's this is not a trivial matter.
15:38
15:38
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:40
15:40
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Okay, well, thank you for that. Um, Minister, I just the reason I was asking that was I, uh. Wondered whether there was agreement about what was produced. Um, and whether there was resistance to the production of, of this, um, of this document, which I agree is of tremendous importance and is a real asset in terms of informing the general public about these issues. Did you face resistance about publishing this?
15:41
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, I mean, it's part of routine cross-government resilience planning, but I think it's actually standing as a groundbreaking piece of work because what it does for the first time is bring together biodiversity loss, ecosystem degradation, pollution, and national security into a single cross-government assessment and looks at that at a kind of global scale. And I don't think that that endeavour has, has has been undertaken before. And I'm really pleased that it's gathered such significant levels of interest from your committee. But both here in the UK and internationally.
Um, which demonstrates our impact and leadership in this kind of interesting nexus, um, around biodiversity loss. And, you know, it's, it often tends to be treated as something that happens over there, you know, something happens to nature, something outside. But actually what this does is, is look at the kind of human impacts as well. And I feel like that, that blending together of, um, the human, the natural, and then the systems approach is something that's quite unique.
Um, which demonstrates our impact and leadership in this kind of interesting nexus, um, around biodiversity loss. And, you know, it's, it often tends to be treated as something that happens over there, you know, something happens to nature, something outside. But actually what this does is, is look at the kind of human impacts as well. And I feel like that, that blending together of, um, the human, the natural, and then the systems approach is something that's quite unique.
15:42
15:42
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Thank you. Chairman. Sticking with, um, cross-government working in respect of climate change and national security, we know that there was a climate security task force stood up a few weeks ago, um, with a range of experts, including General Ngugi on it. It's chaired by um, co-chaired by ministers from Disney's and the Home Office. Um, but we, we note that Defra um, is, is not part of, of that task force. Um, have you, have you any thoughts on why that might be the case.
15:43
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I think this is, um, one of the things that um has, has sort of in a way, it's one of the consequences of this report is, is us looking at strengthening cross-government coordination on climate and nature risks. Um, and you're right to say that we launched that task force during London Climate Action Week. This is a short term, so it's a tangible but time limited mechanism bringing together security, military and academic experts to turn evidence into action so it will help close the gap between our ambition and our delivery, um, and also provide us with independent challenge.
So it's going to look at the key gaps and the most significant climate and nature related risks to our security and resilience. Um, and identify opportunities and areas of strategic focus for the government, including where we can shape resilience, um, outcomes internationally as well. Um, so nature and food representation is absolutely essential and water of course. Um, so we've got experts on the task force. Nathalie Pettorelli, Tim Benton But my understanding is that other experts will be added to the task force, and I'm continuing to press for strong nature representation in this group.
Uh, so that that nature focus isn't lost.
So it's going to look at the key gaps and the most significant climate and nature related risks to our security and resilience. Um, and identify opportunities and areas of strategic focus for the government, including where we can shape resilience, um, outcomes internationally as well. Um, so nature and food representation is absolutely essential and water of course. Um, so we've got experts on the task force. Nathalie Pettorelli, Tim Benton But my understanding is that other experts will be added to the task force, and I'm continuing to press for strong nature representation in this group.
Uh, so that that nature focus isn't lost.
15:43
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
given that we know that things like the loss of pollinators, uh, threaten food security and that that's, that can be a driver of conflict, especially as climate change becomes more of a challenge. Do you, do you not think that actually Defra should have been part, uh, you know, part of the chairing group for that or represented in it more prominently?
15:44
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I think I'm what I would say is that, um, at, at the. Point in Defra, we have, we're looking at land use, we're looking at food security. Um, we are looking at climate adaptation. We are working on the full waste spectrum. So, um, I'm, I'm happy. I'm content. Um, that, um, that colleagues are chairing it, but I will expect regular update impact and, and feedback on it. And, and I think it's, um, it's about us being in the heart of this and I'm confident that the academic experts that are there, um, will do a great job.
What we do know is the value of pollinators to the UK economy is around £1 billion a year. We've got bees needs the event in RHS Wisley next week celebrating pollinators and all of the brilliant work that is happening across the country to try and protect and preserve our. It's not just bees, it's other pollinators. And there are dozens of them that get less of a good press than bees. So we've got to look after the small things that that don't have such good PR.
Um, and also we've announced today our species recovery fund, which is £60 million, the largest budget ever. Um, allocated by any government, uh, to, to tackle, um, to, to protect and avoid the extinction of some of our most fragile populations. So that goes from birds like the red billed chough down to the glutinous snail, which is extinct in England, to all sorts of exciting northern dune sand beetles. So we are, we are really focusing through our environmental improvement plan on the actions that we're taking to tackle that biodiversity loss and make sure that when we turn up to the climate and nature conferences, um, at the UN this autumn, um, that we are shown to be and are playing our part in this global effort.
What we do know is the value of pollinators to the UK economy is around £1 billion a year. We've got bees needs the event in RHS Wisley next week celebrating pollinators and all of the brilliant work that is happening across the country to try and protect and preserve our. It's not just bees, it's other pollinators. And there are dozens of them that get less of a good press than bees. So we've got to look after the small things that that don't have such good PR.
Um, and also we've announced today our species recovery fund, which is £60 million, the largest budget ever. Um, allocated by any government, uh, to, to tackle, um, to, to protect and avoid the extinction of some of our most fragile populations. So that goes from birds like the red billed chough down to the glutinous snail, which is extinct in England, to all sorts of exciting northern dune sand beetles. So we are, we are really focusing through our environmental improvement plan on the actions that we're taking to tackle that biodiversity loss and make sure that when we turn up to the climate and nature conferences, um, at the UN this autumn, um, that we are shown to be and are playing our part in this global effort.
15:45
15:45
15:46
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
So I think so. I was a bit confused about this. So I've gone back to basics on it because I think I think you asked me this question in Defra orals. Yeah. Um, a couple of weeks back and there was this kind of which document is which um there's a thing called the futures report. Um and that is um it's a separate, a completely separate, um document. Um so, so the times, let's just go back to what's in, in the, the record, the times reported that the NSA was the conclusion of a 2024 report.
You know, I've seen the internal futures document and I, my friend, um, the previous minister for farming, Angela Eagle, has also read it. Um, but only as a result of you asking that question. It was not something that we, that I knew about prior to your question.
You know, I've seen the internal futures document and I, my friend, um, the previous minister for farming, Angela Eagle, has also read it. Um, but only as a result of you asking that question. It was not something that we, that I knew about prior to your question.
15:47
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Okay. Thank you for that. And just to clarify, the report you're referring to there, which I did ask about in Defra orals a couple of weeks ago, was about the Defra Futures report on the state of our critical systems from 2030. And beyond. That report is equally stark and seems to have also been suppressed. Although I'm glad that some ministers have now read it and I think could be a whole separate discussion and inquiry that this Committee could could look at.
But what I'm talking about today is the Joint Intelligence Committee's national security assessment. My understanding is that it was only a redacted version of that report, released, as the chair said, on the basis of Freedom of Information request, is it not the case that it's the MPs and this committee still only have access to a redacted version of the National security assessment?
But what I'm talking about today is the Joint Intelligence Committee's national security assessment. My understanding is that it was only a redacted version of that report, released, as the chair said, on the basis of Freedom of Information request, is it not the case that it's the MPs and this committee still only have access to a redacted version of the National security assessment?
15:47
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, what you have. So let's just go back to the futures report, because that was an early stage. That was a very early piece of work, and it dated from 2022. I was a bit when I read it, I was a bit like, um, not I. Wasn't impressed, frankly, as a non-scientist, I didn't think it stood up. Um, and I, you know, I was, um, it was an internal horizon scanning document. Um, it was not formal.
It was not adopted as government analysis or policy. And it's not part of our assessment. So that's that bit put to bed. So this is the trouble when we have documents coming out and we're not quite clear which documents we're talking about. Let me it wasn't it wasn't completed or quality assured. So that's that's the futures document. Um so it was internal analytical material. Um, but what I would say is, you know, it's documents go through many versions and we all get to version 32 in the end.
And that's the thing that we put out. We've got the thing that we put out. It talks about the risks from wide scale, uh, ecosystem collapse. It talks about the risks from pollution. It talks about the risk of boreal forest collapse. It talks about the risks of mangrove collapse. All of these risks are there for everybody to see. That's that's it's quite, it's quite um that's bad. That's bad enough.
It's kind of we've got enough to be going on with in the published document.
It was not adopted as government analysis or policy. And it's not part of our assessment. So that's that bit put to bed. So this is the trouble when we have documents coming out and we're not quite clear which documents we're talking about. Let me it wasn't it wasn't completed or quality assured. So that's that's the futures document. Um so it was internal analytical material. Um, but what I would say is, you know, it's documents go through many versions and we all get to version 32 in the end.
And that's the thing that we put out. We've got the thing that we put out. It talks about the risks from wide scale, uh, ecosystem collapse. It talks about the risks from pollution. It talks about the risk of boreal forest collapse. It talks about the risks of mangrove collapse. All of these risks are there for everybody to see. That's that's it's quite, it's quite um that's bad. That's bad enough.
It's kind of we've got enough to be going on with in the published document.
15:50
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Okay. Well I'm glad you've highlighted the Defra futures report. I take what you say that the committee, the department's going to need to look back at the evidence it produced. From what I saw, it was deeply worrying because the Defra experts were saying that our critical systems could be at threat of collapse, potentially as early as 2030, and an increasing prospect to 2050 if the committee if the department's got an updated assessment. Let's see it. Let's investigate it.
Let's scrutinise it as a as a committee, but accepting what you've said about the need to focus on the content, you know. All of us here are here, yourselves and ourselves, because we want to make sure that the UK is is as resilient as it can be, whether it's food security, water security or, as this report says, the fact that biodiversity collapse is a threat to national security. And as the chair has implied, it has been like pulling teeth, trying to get a full version of this report in front of us, trying to get a debate.
I've been pushing for this since I first asked a question in January. Hasn't this repeated delay just delayed us with getting on to what we really need to be doing, which is to looking at, you know, is the government's response to these huge major risks to things like whether we've got enough food to feed ourselves, hasn't it delayed us from getting on with that scrutiny?
Let's scrutinise it as a as a committee, but accepting what you've said about the need to focus on the content, you know. All of us here are here, yourselves and ourselves, because we want to make sure that the UK is is as resilient as it can be, whether it's food security, water security or, as this report says, the fact that biodiversity collapse is a threat to national security. And as the chair has implied, it has been like pulling teeth, trying to get a full version of this report in front of us, trying to get a debate.
I've been pushing for this since I first asked a question in January. Hasn't this repeated delay just delayed us with getting on to what we really need to be doing, which is to looking at, you know, is the government's response to these huge major risks to things like whether we've got enough food to feed ourselves, hasn't it delayed us from getting on with that scrutiny?
15:51
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
No. Um, we published our environmental improvement plan in December. We published a land use framework plan in March. And as I say today we're announcing our largest ever three year species recovery fund. I would strongly counter that. We've been sitting, waiting for this document to come out before we, um, started shifting ourselves into taking action on this. We've passed legislation to clear up our rivers, lakes and seas. Um, we've effectively banned neonicotinoid pesticides.
I mean, we have, we have taken really strong action across every element of this, whether that's pollution and anything, or the entire waste system, whether that's food waste collections, which are all about reducing the methane out of our food waste bins, which is the carbon. Um, you know, the global warming gas that we can do the most about in the shortest period of time. So we haven't been sitting around waiting for some scientists, uh, to, to sort of check each other's homework and then come to us and say, well, Minister, things are really bad.
We know things are really bad. You know, I spent three years as chair of this committee and three years as shadow secretary of state. You know, I've spent the last 15 years of my life and and including the five years where I had my mini sabbatical talking and working with civil servants at Cranfield University, saying, things are really bad. Here's what government needs to do on a policy level. So this document is not suddenly like we've all woken up, it's published and it's like, oh crap, we better crack on with things.
Now. We've been cracking on from day one.
I mean, we have, we have taken really strong action across every element of this, whether that's pollution and anything, or the entire waste system, whether that's food waste collections, which are all about reducing the methane out of our food waste bins, which is the carbon. Um, you know, the global warming gas that we can do the most about in the shortest period of time. So we haven't been sitting around waiting for some scientists, uh, to, to sort of check each other's homework and then come to us and say, well, Minister, things are really bad.
We know things are really bad. You know, I spent three years as chair of this committee and three years as shadow secretary of state. You know, I've spent the last 15 years of my life and and including the five years where I had my mini sabbatical talking and working with civil servants at Cranfield University, saying, things are really bad. Here's what government needs to do on a policy level. So this document is not suddenly like we've all woken up, it's published and it's like, oh crap, we better crack on with things.
Now. We've been cracking on from day one.
15:53
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Yeah, I accept there's good work being done. There are some good things in what you've just said, and we'll want to scrutinise whether the extent of the response. And it's not just about Defra response, it's about the extent of the cross-government response is adequate for the scale of the challenge. One of my concerns is if we look at the sorts of issues that arise from this report, they're not just about areas within Defra responsibility, it's about energy policy, trade policy, migration, security issues. So how is the government ensuring there is a cross-government response to this, and particularly noting that the Cabinet Office minister declined to come in front of us today?
15:53
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, I mean, look, the ecosystem I mean, if we if we look at the actual report, um, you know, and, um, and the coral reef collapse and it says, um, you know, realistic possibility of collapse starting from 2030. Um, there has been a lot of work and overseas programming done in the kind of work that we've done with our overseas terrorists. Territories on um, I can't remember what it's called, but it's something like spiny coral reef disease. So we've been looking at what are the resilient corals that we can take out, put into nurseries and grow as replacement corals as the ocean warms.
You've heard on the news this morning, the five degree and the massive marine heat wave that's taking place around the UK. The octopus coming into Brixham, eating, eating the crabs, all the stuff we like to eat. Um, so, you know, we're looking at these at these things through our overseas territories programming, through our global Ocean Resilience programme and through the, um, the various overseas marine funding, which I'm going to ask Miss Ledward to come in and talk about more fluently than me.
You've heard on the news this morning, the five degree and the massive marine heat wave that's taking place around the UK. The octopus coming into Brixham, eating, eating the crabs, all the stuff we like to eat. Um, so, you know, we're looking at these at these things through our overseas territories programming, through our global Ocean Resilience programme and through the, um, the various overseas marine funding, which I'm going to ask Miss Ledward to come in and talk about more fluently than me.
15:54
15:54
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, um, I'd like to say a little bit about I've set up a little task force. I've set up my own task force. Um, and this is a group of, um, it's mainly sort of Defra, but it's a group of all the sort of civil servants who are working on this across government, um, to look at environmental resilience and efficiency in government. And I think that's actually really important as well because, um, we. Have a, um, a need to look at our own resilience, efficiency and environmental task force, um, and look at what we can do as government as well.
So there's a little bit of that going on in this. I'm upset that that's, you know, that's going on at a very sort of, um, official level, um, very simple projects, circular economy, pilot projects in prisons, looking at water leaks in prisons. MoJ saved £4 million in one year just by finding and fixing leaks. Really, really simple things. Sort of doesn't sound like a lot, but £4 million off your water bill is actually a good deal for the taxpayer. It's a good deal for the environment.
And in a heat wave, when we're all showering more and getting the paddling pools out, um, then it's, um, then it's, it's a really important part that government steps up and plays its part in terms of, um, what we're doing across government. Um, I mean, we've had, we've had the discussion about the climate security task force. I would say that this is something that is now, uh, talked about in different government departments in a way that when I was, when I was here in 2019 simply was not, um, it was not an item for discussion in Ministry of Education, Ministry of defence, um, cabinet Office, I think it absolutely is now.
So there's a little bit of that going on in this. I'm upset that that's, you know, that's going on at a very sort of, um, official level, um, very simple projects, circular economy, pilot projects in prisons, looking at water leaks in prisons. MoJ saved £4 million in one year just by finding and fixing leaks. Really, really simple things. Sort of doesn't sound like a lot, but £4 million off your water bill is actually a good deal for the taxpayer. It's a good deal for the environment.
And in a heat wave, when we're all showering more and getting the paddling pools out, um, then it's, um, then it's, it's a really important part that government steps up and plays its part in terms of, um, what we're doing across government. Um, I mean, we've had, we've had the discussion about the climate security task force. I would say that this is something that is now, uh, talked about in different government departments in a way that when I was, when I was here in 2019 simply was not, um, it was not an item for discussion in Ministry of Education, Ministry of defence, um, cabinet Office, I think it absolutely is now.
15:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Can I just clarify because I don't want to spend any more time on this. Um, but I don't think there's any misunderstanding about what report we're talking about. And, and what you've just said does not tally with what we were told. So the document that's been published is an abridged version of the Biodiversity National Security Assessment. There is a longer unabridged version. Many of us have already seen it. It's been leaked. The times have seen it, ITV have seen it.
I'm sure you've seen it. Minister. We asked your officials if we could see it. Um, under, uh you know, under. Strict confidentiality basis. And we were told that we weren't so, so I don't want there to be any misunderstanding about what it is we're talking about here. That is what we are. What you describe suggested it was the thing that was released was just a later iteration of the same report. But I don't believe that that is that is true.
Can you clarify that there is, uh, an unabridged version of the Biodiversity National Security Assessment?Um, and can you clarify why this committee was not able to see it?
I'm sure you've seen it. Minister. We asked your officials if we could see it. Um, under, uh you know, under. Strict confidentiality basis. And we were told that we weren't so, so I don't want there to be any misunderstanding about what it is we're talking about here. That is what we are. What you describe suggested it was the thing that was released was just a later iteration of the same report. But I don't believe that that is that is true.
Can you clarify that there is, uh, an unabridged version of the Biodiversity National Security Assessment?Um, and can you clarify why this committee was not able to see it?
15:57
15:57
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Okay. Thank you chair, and I want to focus on the, uh, international collaboration, which I'm assuming underpins the preparation of, of such security assessments. So can I ask the minister what level of cooperation is there between intelligence communities and organizations on the on the security threat of global biodiversity loss compared to cooperation on security threats arising from climate breakdown?
15:59
15:59
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Because of biodiversity loss, it's, you know, it's it's a threat that is not just to the UK. And obviously preparation with other countries. Uh, might actually, um, allow us to be more prepared as well on threats coming, uh, whether there are invasive species, whether they are pathogens and so on. How collaborative was the report in an international sense or you don't know, you can't tell us about that.
15:59
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
I genuinely don't know. Um, what I can say in terms of our international partners is that we have strong relationships with embassies. Um, and governments right across the world, um, that we have, um, a global demand for our expertise to help, um, in terms of how they value and account for nature. Um, we have had a particularly successful partnership with the government of Ecuador, um, who have, have sort of as a result of our technical assistance, um, put, um nature. Into their national accounts.
Um, you know, there are a wide range of sort of excellent projects and um, we're working now on global ocean accounting so that, um, you know, the, the small island developing states and the people that rely on ocean for their food, um, which is, I think two, 2 billion people relying on the oceans as their primary source of protein. Um, we're trying to get into how we account for that and how they account for that in their national accounts, because it's clear that this is the primary risk that they face is the loss of that of that food supply.
So things like that, we can talk about sort of particular projects, but not really in a kind of, um, intelligence and security framework. But of course it is. It's about the security of the lives and livelihoods of the inhabitants of those places.
Um, you know, there are a wide range of sort of excellent projects and um, we're working now on global ocean accounting so that, um, you know, the, the small island developing states and the people that rely on ocean for their food, um, which is, I think two, 2 billion people relying on the oceans as their primary source of protein. Um, we're trying to get into how we account for that and how they account for that in their national accounts, because it's clear that this is the primary risk that they face is the loss of that of that food supply.
So things like that, we can talk about sort of particular projects, but not really in a kind of, um, intelligence and security framework. But of course it is. It's about the security of the lives and livelihoods of the inhabitants of those places.
16:00
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
So on the back of your assessment, is the government now pushing for biodiversity loss to be framed more clearly, more explicitly as a security issue and resilience issue in, in different fora, including, for example, in meetings and discussions with NATO. And also, um, are you taking this opportunity to incorporate this really important issue, for example, in UK trade negotiations?
16:01
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
So I think we set out our international climate finance ICF for strategy on the 22nd of June. And that set out that nature is a priority for the UK's international climate finance um, protecting and. Restoring nature, including forests, ocean and coastal, terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. So that is a key part of the work that I do with Minister White and with um, Baroness Chapman. In a kind of tri a triumvirate way, if I may say, if I may use that slightly old fashioned word.
Um, so yes, we are um also the, the chronic risks analysis highlights biodiversity loss as a vulnerability. So that's a UK document outlining the impacts on medicine, food security and food supply. Because much of our medicine comes from the forests and the plants that are at risk of extinction. So we are trying, um, to, to sort of encourage. Uh, sort of, uh, international companies to understand that things that may not have been discovered yet are in these forests. And we actually have to protect these forests in order to protect the future of, uh, new and novel innovative medicines, for example, or beauty products or whatever it may be.
Um, so we've put it into our climate finance strategy. Um, it's part of our chronic risks analysis.
Um, so yes, we are um also the, the chronic risks analysis highlights biodiversity loss as a vulnerability. So that's a UK document outlining the impacts on medicine, food security and food supply. Because much of our medicine comes from the forests and the plants that are at risk of extinction. So we are trying, um, to, to sort of encourage. Uh, sort of, uh, international companies to understand that things that may not have been discovered yet are in these forests. And we actually have to protect these forests in order to protect the future of, uh, new and novel innovative medicines, for example, or beauty products or whatever it may be.
Um, so we've put it into our climate finance strategy. Um, it's part of our chronic risks analysis.
16:02
16:02
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
So. The G20 next year is, is a really important opportunity for us to shape the global multilateral agenda. Um, it's our first G20 since 2009. Um, and it's going to be followed by our G7 20 presidency the year after in 2028. Um, the Prime Minister has outlined a five point plan for growth at the G20 summit in South Africa. And it's included supporting global growth, reinforcing stability, advancing advancing economic stability and prosperity in the UK and beyond. But we are still our environment, our environment and nature.
Priorities are still in the process of being determined, and we're going to announce our decisions on that later this year.
Priorities are still in the process of being determined, and we're going to announce our decisions on that later this year.
16:03
16:03
16:03
16:03
16:04
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you chair. So just reflecting really on the government's response to the issues that came forward in the in the assessment and how that's affecting the work that we're doing. So the latest. Progress report made it clear that government remains off track in terms of meeting its nature goals. And it says we must move mountains by 2030 to be a global leader. So what impact does this failure to meet domestic targets have on the UK's standing internationally?I think we're meeting three out of 23 of our targets.
16:04
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, we went through those yesterday actually, because I thought this question might come up. And actually we're doing much better than you would think. Um so if you look on um the sort of green, amber and red, um, I need to find the bit in my, um, so many things in here, I see a four. Where is it in my document. So let me just go to it. Um, it's deep, deep, deep in the weeds of my. Thing now I can't find it now.
Uh, here we go. This is the thing I used yesterday. So these are global biodiversity targets. So it's for the entire world to deliver. But clearly we want to play our part. And we've got, um, things where we're on track and things where I think we're off track. So um, there's quite a lot where I think we're on track. So for example, target three, the 30 by 30. Um, we have um, got a plan and we'll be setting out next week our intentions and we're going to, we're going to do a slightly innovative thing, which is we're going to class land as a, I don't know whether I'm allowed to say this, but I've said it before.
I've said it before, okay, we're going to class land as bronze, silver and gold in terms of our trajectory towards 30 by 30. So not everything is going to be gold, but we, we want to show it can't just be sitting at 7% and we say, oh, it's terrible. We've had a failure. Um, we have to look at what land is sort of consecrated for nature, if you like, or is always going to be managed for nature. And um, the land use framework has been really interesting and important in being encouraging about what we need to do to go further.
Um, our IP has really clear delivery mechanisms involved, which the previous government's IP simply didn't include. So we've got trajectories, we've got financial allocations alongside it. We've got on target 13. We have played a really crucial part internationally in terms of access and benefit sharing regulations. So that's that bit about these big companies. That's the fund and putting cash into it. Um the target 17 biosafety measures and distribute the benefits of biotechnology. Again, we're doing well there and on target 20, this is where I think we really world leading, which is this capacity building tech transfer, legal understanding, scientific and technical cooperation, because of course, we've got 250 years of, um, you know, going around the world bringing interesting specimens, whether there's plants, animals, fungi back.
Um, and so, um, we did our gender inclusive and on target 23 very close to my heart. I launched the gender inclusive principles for biodiversity action because often in this nature discussion, uh, women's voices are crowded out. Um, so we developed alongside indigenous people and local communities, what we wanted to do. And so that has informed a lot of the programming that we're now doing. So I think it's very easy to sort of get into a, it's all terrible mindset. Things are bad, don't you know?And I'm under no illusions, but I think we're on target also to get the cash in that we said we would get as well.
So, um, looking at that, I'm reassured that the amount of money for global biodiversity, we are on target to hit that. And there's a huge interest, um, from a variety of corporations who want to do this. They understand climate change and the risks associated with that. They are less confident on nature and biodiversity loss. And they're certainly very working very closely with us on projects that they feel are going to be good nature projects that will deliver stuff. So it's, you know, only three targets.
I feel it's a slight underselling our achievements.
Uh, here we go. This is the thing I used yesterday. So these are global biodiversity targets. So it's for the entire world to deliver. But clearly we want to play our part. And we've got, um, things where we're on track and things where I think we're off track. So um, there's quite a lot where I think we're on track. So for example, target three, the 30 by 30. Um, we have um, got a plan and we'll be setting out next week our intentions and we're going to, we're going to do a slightly innovative thing, which is we're going to class land as a, I don't know whether I'm allowed to say this, but I've said it before.
I've said it before, okay, we're going to class land as bronze, silver and gold in terms of our trajectory towards 30 by 30. So not everything is going to be gold, but we, we want to show it can't just be sitting at 7% and we say, oh, it's terrible. We've had a failure. Um, we have to look at what land is sort of consecrated for nature, if you like, or is always going to be managed for nature. And um, the land use framework has been really interesting and important in being encouraging about what we need to do to go further.
Um, our IP has really clear delivery mechanisms involved, which the previous government's IP simply didn't include. So we've got trajectories, we've got financial allocations alongside it. We've got on target 13. We have played a really crucial part internationally in terms of access and benefit sharing regulations. So that's that bit about these big companies. That's the fund and putting cash into it. Um the target 17 biosafety measures and distribute the benefits of biotechnology. Again, we're doing well there and on target 20, this is where I think we really world leading, which is this capacity building tech transfer, legal understanding, scientific and technical cooperation, because of course, we've got 250 years of, um, you know, going around the world bringing interesting specimens, whether there's plants, animals, fungi back.
Um, and so, um, we did our gender inclusive and on target 23 very close to my heart. I launched the gender inclusive principles for biodiversity action because often in this nature discussion, uh, women's voices are crowded out. Um, so we developed alongside indigenous people and local communities, what we wanted to do. And so that has informed a lot of the programming that we're now doing. So I think it's very easy to sort of get into a, it's all terrible mindset. Things are bad, don't you know?And I'm under no illusions, but I think we're on target also to get the cash in that we said we would get as well.
So, um, looking at that, I'm reassured that the amount of money for global biodiversity, we are on target to hit that. And there's a huge interest, um, from a variety of corporations who want to do this. They understand climate change and the risks associated with that. They are less confident on nature and biodiversity loss. And they're certainly very working very closely with us on projects that they feel are going to be good nature projects that will deliver stuff. So it's, you know, only three targets.
I feel it's a slight underselling our achievements.
16:08
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
It's very encouraging. And I think we would all agree with what's written in the report that meaningful progress is being made. And they can see that the foundations are in place. But specifically, we just want to understand whether the sort of slowness of getting there has had any impact on our global, um, reputation. Is there any international consequence of us being slightly behind where we might want to have been?
16:09
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, I think I would say that, um my colleague Emma Hardy, Minister Hardy attended the um. The oceans conference in Kenya. Uh, we are sort of leading players in the global Plastic Pollution Treaty, and we've been working on that very obviously very disappointed that that has not been effectively concluded. And we are coming into a triple cop year. Um, and we are extremely keen to, um, have a, um, to play a full part there and including on the, we've not been that involved in the desertification cop um, previously because it's sort of not been seen as a thing that, you know, Britain needs to worry about.
But actually I think the UK does need to worry about it. And perhaps I can ask Ross to say something about Fcdo's involvement in that.
But actually I think the UK does need to worry about it. And perhaps I can ask Ross to say something about Fcdo's involvement in that.
16:10
16:10
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
I mean, obviously the certification cop cop 17 I think we very much see as a moment to build a bit of momentum on, on some of the UK objectives, including resilience in food systems in the most vulnerable countries, which obviously of, of huge concern at this moment in time, uh, that will include kind of improving soil health, um, as well as kind of wider issues around, for example, peace, security and land rights, including in fragile and conflict affected states. And then finally, I think we see as in a moment to think about our kind of partnerships with the global South, particularly African countries.
Um, and so very much kind of looking forward to that moment as an opportunity to kind of build on that.
Um, and so very much kind of looking forward to that moment as an opportunity to kind of build on that.
16:10
16:10
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
I mean, I think the. The evidence in the report actually kind of speaks to a number of the priorities, which we in Fcdo, obviously in partnership with other government departments, are are kind of approaching this issue and indeed kind of taking action on this issue. So be that through some of the work on forests. And of course, that's absolutely critical. Um, ecosystem. So, you know, we have work that is around kind of not only protecting those forests, but thinking about how we sustainably manage that natural resource and support local communities in both doing that and also thinking about their livelihoods as well, be that in oceans, um, and our Blue belt program, uh, is, is there to kind of do that across the overseas territories.
Um, thinking about how we support sustainable management of that, um, including, I think that's about 4 million km2 of oceans. And then our wider work on, um, you know, water management, food security and the like. So there's, I think there's a lot of the work that we are doing already, uh, is, uh, speaks to the priorities and the issues that are set out in the report and will continue to, to build on that in future years.
Um, thinking about how we support sustainable management of that, um, including, I think that's about 4 million km2 of oceans. And then our wider work on, um, you know, water management, food security and the like. So there's, I think there's a lot of the work that we are doing already, uh, is, uh, speaks to the priorities and the issues that are set out in the report and will continue to, to build on that in future years.
16:11
16:11
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Um, well, we know that we've got a water bill coming in in the second session, and we're certainly looking at what bills will go forward in our third session. Um, it is clear that there are some issues with some of the nature and wildlife protections that have not been updated, um, since um, in some cases 1989, uh, in some cases going back even further, um, and I'm very keen that, um, we tackle that, but as you will understand, having, we've had 15 years of, um, very little nature legislation. Um, and so we obviously have to take our place patiently in the queue.
16:12
16:12
16:12
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Thank you, chair, and thank you, Minister, for coming in front of us today. Some not all of the questions I'm going to ask are, I know, uniquely your responsibility, but you are the minister in front of us today. And I will also be looking for some answers from missiles as well. So look, it's every critical, critical ecosystem on a pathway to collapse and irreversible loss of function. And yourself, Minister, you've already said today all of these risks are there for everyone to see.
And yet we are cutting our overseas development assistance, which this committee and others have heard is a really important way of investing in protecting that biodiversity globally. So is it really possible to adequately respond to the challenges posed by the national security assessment with Oda levels reduced to just 0.3% of of our national income?
And yet we are cutting our overseas development assistance, which this committee and others have heard is a really important way of investing in protecting that biodiversity globally. So is it really possible to adequately respond to the challenges posed by the national security assessment with Oda levels reduced to just 0.3% of of our national income?
16:13
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Well, what I would say is, um, that we are allocating around £6 billion of international climate finance from our aid budget over the next three financial years that is going to be allocated between mitigation and adaptation. And it's going to also retain a strong focus on nature. Um, our goal is to deliver an additional £6.7 billion of UK backed climate and nature positive public finance Non-oda through our contributions to the IMF's resilience and Sustainability Trust, through our guarantees to multilateral development banks, UK export finance and British international investment.
And we're also very keen to mobilise billions more from the private sector over the three years, including by leveraging the City of London's position as the green finance capital of the world. So, you know, the nature of the world has changed. Um, you know, that money has gone to, um, in, in, in order to meet our NATO obligations under defence. Um, but we're talking about, we're talking about national security today. So, you know, both, both parts of the security are very important.
What I would also say is, um, in terms of, um, you know, our partnership on climate security with the EU has been formalised under the Security and Defence Partnership last year, and we've got some joint priority projects for joint delivery and holding initial technical exchanges. So there's some work going on with the EU in the kind of security and defence space um as well.
And we're also very keen to mobilise billions more from the private sector over the three years, including by leveraging the City of London's position as the green finance capital of the world. So, you know, the nature of the world has changed. Um, you know, that money has gone to, um, in, in, in order to meet our NATO obligations under defence. Um, but we're talking about, we're talking about national security today. So, you know, both, both parts of the security are very important.
What I would also say is, um, in terms of, um, you know, our partnership on climate security with the EU has been formalised under the Security and Defence Partnership last year, and we've got some joint priority projects for joint delivery and holding initial technical exchanges. So there's some work going on with the EU in the kind of security and defence space um as well.
16:14
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
I'm maybe just want to provide an example here because it's useful that you mentioned, you know, ah, the defence investment plan people won't be able to see, but there's a debate going on right now in the main chamber about rearmament and war fighting readiness. And we're debating, you know, putting billions of pounds into military hardware. And yet, in the context of national security and the importance of global biodiversity to that, the times has reported that funding for the Congo Basin Forest Action Programme has been quietly cut by 79% due to the wider cuts to foreign aid.
And I can't help. Isn't this indicative of the government generally, uh, failing to take the security impacts of biodiversity as seriously as it does our defence priorities?
And I can't help. Isn't this indicative of the government generally, uh, failing to take the security impacts of biodiversity as seriously as it does our defence priorities?
16:14
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Um, so what I would say is public finance cannot do it all. Um, the, the idea that we can have a pound for the climate, a pound for nature and a pound for desertification is over. And we are not the only government that is, um, you know, ramping up um war readiness and, and national security as a result of the changing geopolitical situation. Um, what I would say is that, um, in reviewing the projects, um, we are generally looking at the ones that have reached completion or the ones where we feel there has been less impact.
Um, and we are looking at that through that lens, perhaps misled would, would like to say anything. I don't know about the Congo Basin partnership.
Um, and we are looking at that through that lens, perhaps misled would, would like to say anything. I don't know about the Congo Basin partnership.
16:15
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Yeah. I think Roz is probably best placed to talk specifically about the Congo Basin forestry programming, but I think the, the, um, the CBD have been very clear that it's and the United Nations Environment Programme have clarified that for the $220 billion of nature positive finance in the system, there are $7.3 trillion of each year of negative, harmful finance flowing in the system. So it's a 30 to 1 ratio of positive to negative, harmful to nature positive flows. So actually, the trick is about how you pivot and shift the system and start to tackle the subsidies and the harmful subsidies and tackle some of the the finance that's having a negative impact.
And so actually, that doesn't require large amounts of UK public finance to do that. That's about, um, a new development paradigm and a shift to a new development approach, which means using technical assistance, science data. Um, and some of our other levers to do that. Um, so I think, um.
And so actually, that doesn't require large amounts of UK public finance to do that. That's about, um, a new development paradigm and a shift to a new development approach, which means using technical assistance, science data. Um, and some of our other levers to do that. Um, so I think, um.
16:16
16:16
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Certainly something we're kind of focused on through and indeed in a forest context. So our partnerships for forests program has mobilized over £1 billion of investment. Private investments actually into forests across the globe, including Congo Basin, but central west East Africa, Latam, South South East Asia as well. Um, and that is very much about thinking how, um, we kind of use forests as sustainable commodities, manage them responsibly, um, and support local communities to do that whilst ensuring livelihoods as well. And I think that's a really good example of the approach that we need to globally, all of us think about in terms of how we leverage in leveraging nature positive investment.
16:17
16:17
16:17
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Try and go quite quickly. And I will come back to private finance in a moment. But on this issue of a new approach to how we're using public finance, um, in terms of protecting global biodiversity, Baroness Chapman described the decision to drop the nature sub pledge under ICF four and move instead to an approach that seeks to integrate climate and nature nature into aid programming as a gamble. Again, given everything that we're talking about, about the risks of global biodiversity collapse to our national security, is it wise to be taking a gamble?
16:18
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Well, she she said what she said, what I would say is in difficult um, given the new realities of the funding, we have been laser focused on making sure that nature and the oceans are at the front and centre of this and that every pound doesn't just deliver for aid, but that it delivers for climate mitigation and adaptation as well, and levers in money from elsewhere. And that's, that's, I think, you know, it's a change from the old here's, you know, the 0.7, um, you know, money out the door program through DfID offices, all the visits that I did in back in 2006 to DRC, incredibly difficult country to, to work in, by the way, and, and, you know, issues around that.
So I, I feel like, you know, we're not going to do it through. We're not going to do it on our own. We have to do this in partnership. And the old days of German Germany doing this, US aid, doing that, France doing this, and everyone turning up with their flags on it. We just have to get better at this.
So I, I feel like, you know, we're not going to do it through. We're not going to do it on our own. We have to do this in partnership. And the old days of German Germany doing this, US aid, doing that, France doing this, and everyone turning up with their flags on it. We just have to get better at this.
16:19
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you. Well, you've set me up perfectly for my next question then, which is the Biodiversity National Security Assessment sites, the Amazon rainforest is one of the most critical ecosystems for us in terms of its role in food production and weather cycles. Um, and yet the UK is yet to make a contribution to the Tropical Forests Forever Fund. Norway has, France has, Germany has. Brazil, Indonesia, even Luxembourg. Luxembourg. When will we make a contribution?
16:19
16:20
16:20
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I genuinely don't know. Um but what I would say is that we on deforestation, we have introduced our um we've announced our approach to tackling deforestation in our supply chains. Um, much we've got 29000 hectares of deforestation associated with our consumption in this country. And we've now um, we're now said that we're going to aim to introduce regs in Great Britain that operate consistently alongside that EU detr. And I think that's a very significant, um, moment in that, um, so, you know, we think that will be good for forest peoples.
We think it'll be good for the businesses. And we also think it will be good for us as UK consumers in terms of our consciences being clear that the coffee and the cocoa and the rubber that we're using, um, is, is deforestation is, is, is free of illegal deforestation.
We think it'll be good for the businesses. And we also think it will be good for us as UK consumers in terms of our consciences being clear that the coffee and the cocoa and the rubber that we're using, um, is, is deforestation is, is, is free of illegal deforestation.
16:20
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Okay. Thank you. And then my final question, there's, there's something like a $700 billion annual biodiversity funding gap globally, obviously not exclusively to be met by this country. The fund was intended to be a way of getting private finance to fill some of that gap. Um, can you confirm to the committee how many donations the fund has received so far from UK businesses, and what the value of those donations has been?
16:21
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
So it was launched a year ago in Rome. Um, it's received one contribution from a UK AI startup called Terra Viva. And that came in in um cop 30 in Brazil. Um, we need businesses to see the benefits and invest in the fund as the most appropriate mechanism for sharing benefits from the use of DSI. What we've done at Kew is essentially digitize the 7 million specimens. Right. Going right back to Darwin. Of all the plants in the world that that holds, which is just the most incredible database, um, people can go and find those plants because it's all geolocated.
Um, they're getting the benefits of this, but they're not giving anything back to the people who are custodians of those incredibly precious areas. We do have, um, progress on the Cali fund. We've got the Armenian presidency working closely with us on the biodiversity, uh, convention, and we've got UK, Chile, Colombia, Armenia, Netherlands, Norway, and the European Commission, um, working together as governments to try and encourage, um, the sort of funding into the Cali fund.
Um, they're getting the benefits of this, but they're not giving anything back to the people who are custodians of those incredibly precious areas. We do have, um, progress on the Cali fund. We've got the Armenian presidency working closely with us on the biodiversity, uh, convention, and we've got UK, Chile, Colombia, Armenia, Netherlands, Norway, and the European Commission, um, working together as governments to try and encourage, um, the sort of funding into the Cali fund.
16:22
16:22
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Just come back to the Tropical Forest Forever Fund. Um. Last week, the minister, um, at Kew Gardens indicated that this was not just a nice idea to have. It was absolutely essential. We are at a stage where other countries which said they would commit to it, are really looking to see what commitment we're going to make. And the danger is, of course, if we don't make, then, uh, money may not come into the fund altogether. And Minister, you've said that.
Well, we're doing our bit by trying to cut down consumption. And and that's admirable. But the problem is that if we don't. Be responsible. Um, if we're not responsible for having forests cut down, somebody else will step in and say, well, if the wood's not going to Britain or if the, the goods which are being produced in the forest are cut down, forests are not going to Britain will go somewhere else. So my question to you is, why is this not being not not being given priority in the aid budget that we have at present?We do know that there's waste in the aid budget.
And why, given it this, we we actually thought this idea we won't be world leaders. We hear all the time that the UK wants to be world leader. Why are we not finding the funds by giving some priority to a project which we were actually responsible for trying to promote?
Well, we're doing our bit by trying to cut down consumption. And and that's admirable. But the problem is that if we don't. Be responsible. Um, if we're not responsible for having forests cut down, somebody else will step in and say, well, if the wood's not going to Britain or if the, the goods which are being produced in the forest are cut down, forests are not going to Britain will go somewhere else. So my question to you is, why is this not being not not being given priority in the aid budget that we have at present?We do know that there's waste in the aid budget.
And why, given it this, we we actually thought this idea we won't be world leaders. We hear all the time that the UK wants to be world leader. Why are we not finding the funds by giving some priority to a project which we were actually responsible for trying to promote?
16:24
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Well, you're right about the Tropical Forest Forever facility. It is a critical evolution in forest finance. Um, we have supported its development. We've pledged 2.5 million to support the establishment of the fund. And, um, we are committed to it being a success. We've done a lot through Fcdo in the REDD which is tackling deforestation space. Um, there is data that is going to be critical to inform uh TFFF monitoring. And we've contributed £48 million of funding towards that at this date.
This is paradoxically I'm not the international forest minister that is held in DNS. So I might ask Fcdo to come and just say a little bit more.
This is paradoxically I'm not the international forest minister that is held in DNS. So I might ask Fcdo to come and just say a little bit more.
16:25
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Yeah. I mean, I'll just reiterate the points we've been firmly supportive of this fund. We've committed to its establishment. We've kind of played a role in shaping it. Um, we're not in a position, as my minister said to the IDC, uh, last week, I think it was, uh, to contribute financially right now. Um, and that's our current position. We, as the minister said, you know, we are hoping and engaging and want and doing everything we can to ensure it is success.
16:26
16:26
16:26
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you chair. Um, I've got some questions about Cop 17. In light of the fact that the minister needs to leave at 430, um, I'm going to slightly switch the order around here because something I really want to be able to ask the minister about. Um, I'm very pleased to hear about your cross-departmental task force. Um, and as a subset of that, I am, and you'll know this as a subject dear to my heart. Um, how closely are you working with Dennis to make sure that climate and nature action are coordinated in a mutually reinforcing way in the context of Cop 17 and Cop 31?
16:27
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
We are, we are indeed. Um, I didn't manage to tell the committee that. We've also launched our government estate for nature plan as well. Last, um, week. So that is, it's again, it's quite niche, but what government owns 4% of, of the land in England and we've crowded in other large landowners like um Crown Estate and some very large private estates. Um so we've got to about 10% of the landmass in England and we've developed some principles about how we're going to manage that land and how, how they're going to experiment using, uh, different sort of nature positive approaches.
It has been hard. I did make a joke that it was, um, sort of worse than the Labour Party in terms of getting the standing orders and the, and the sort of terms of reference established that took us about six months, but we are now at a position that we've got these these landowners signed up to these principles. So there's some really exciting work going on there in terms of, um, cross coordination. It is a bit weird when you go to these cops, because often Minister White will be doing her stuff and I'll be doing my stuff and we might see each other for sort of 20 minutes over breakfast.
But she has very specific and particular things that she is doing. Uh, and often I will be doing my very specific and particular things that I'm doing. So oceans, methane, saltmarsh declaration, for example, last year. Um, and they're not her that they're not the areas where she's working. So I've covered stuff in the past on transport and on, um, education. So often I'm the sort of catch all minister and she's much, much closer as you would expect to the actual um, detailed negotiations.
It has been hard. I did make a joke that it was, um, sort of worse than the Labour Party in terms of getting the standing orders and the, and the sort of terms of reference established that took us about six months, but we are now at a position that we've got these these landowners signed up to these principles. So there's some really exciting work going on there in terms of, um, cross coordination. It is a bit weird when you go to these cops, because often Minister White will be doing her stuff and I'll be doing my stuff and we might see each other for sort of 20 minutes over breakfast.
But she has very specific and particular things that she is doing. Uh, and often I will be doing my very specific and particular things that I'm doing. So oceans, methane, saltmarsh declaration, for example, last year. Um, and they're not her that they're not the areas where she's working. So I've covered stuff in the past on transport and on, um, education. So often I'm the sort of catch all minister and she's much, much closer as you would expect to the actual um, detailed negotiations.
16:28
16:28
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I mean, you'd have to ask her, um, but what I would say is that there's this, um, aim to bring the cops together and, and to get out of this sort of artificial segmentation of today, you know, this week it's climate, next week it's nature because that's not how the world functions. These are all massive systems and they're dealt with through an accident of United Nations history in three completely different conferences, which all have their own carbon footprint costs. Secretariats, you know, wranglings going on. So there is a move to see how we can how we can do more, um, together.
And that's, that's not me and Minister White. That's, that's a kind of look at the UN and how it functions better.
And that's, that's not me and Minister White. That's, that's a kind of look at the UN and how it functions better.
16:29
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I don't, I. Don't, but um, we are engaging with partners and our nature security assessment, which is obviously the subject of this has generated significant international interest and it's strengthening our evidence base for international engagement. And it's shaping how we are talking to our partners.
16:29
16:30
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
She's not coming to my biodiversity cop, but I am going to her climate cop. Um, and we'll both be at the UN General Assembly where all of these issues will be discussed. And of course, during London Climate Action Week, just a couple of weeks ago, we had the first ever nature day at Kew Gardens and at Kew. They've actually got a tree. The Kew Oak that died because of it died in the um heat wave I think, the previous year. Um and they've left it there and to say, you know, climate change killed this tree.
So I think there are some quite interesting, creative, innovative actions happening. Um, is it as, um, what does that say?
So I think there are some quite interesting, creative, innovative actions happening. Um, is it as, um, what does that say?
16:30
16:31
16:31
16:31
16:31
16:32
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
17 I think I actually answered the question on the top objectives previously, but let me say them again. So certainly to build momentum on UK objectives, which are around resilience in food systems in the most vulnerable, vulnerable countries, including improving soil health, uh, peace. Security and land rights, including in, fragile and conflict affected states. And then this final point around strengthening the partnerships with the global South, in particular African countries.
16:32
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you for recapping those. Um, and you may also have touched on this, um, looking at the 2030 targets and the 2050 goals, clearly we're not on track to achieve those at the moment. There's been quite significant drift. So does the government have a specific plan for how it's going to accelerate progress towards those goals?Um at Cop 17.
16:32
16:33
16:33
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Yeah. So going into CBD. Cop 17 in Armenia, obviously the key thing is going to be the global review. And looking at those 134 national reports that have been submitted by governments from across the world. And in looking at that, we'll really have to focus on the increased mobilisation of finance from all sources as the really key, um, area where we've got to accelerate progress the fastest. And so obviously the Cali fund will be a critical part of that, as has already been discussed.
Um, we'll be looking at the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund that was established. The UK is obviously the largest contributor to that to date. Um and we'll also be trying to think and focus on sustained collective action to deliver those 2030 targets. Um, and how we can all keep working together on that.
Um, we'll be looking at the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund that was established. The UK is obviously the largest contributor to that to date. Um and we'll also be trying to think and focus on sustained collective action to deliver those 2030 targets. Um, and how we can all keep working together on that.
16:34
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
And they are global targets. They're not us targets that everybody targets. So that's the thing. Um, can I just say something about the Dutch government?So they've, they've looked at our nature security assessment and they've asked, uh. Kuningan University and research to examine their national biodiversity research needs. So they're copying what we've done on the NSA, which I think is a really quite an interesting development. We're also in a partnership with them on, um, circular economy finance because we know domestically here we need to invest a lot more in our circular economy.
Um, uh, infrastructure. And they've got a brilliant, um, they've got lots of brilliant operationalized, um, methods and techniques. Um, so we've got the money in the city of London and they've got all the people who know how to do it. And so we've signed a partnership, uh, for some joint working between us. So again, this is, this was during climate week, but this is, this is what I mean about, you know, you say, where's nature showing up?Well, it's like, well, we don't want um, plastic bottles in the environment.
So what are we going to do in terms of the recycling side?There's this even here, there's a bit of an artificial distinction between climate and nature. And actually everything's connected.
Um, uh, infrastructure. And they've got a brilliant, um, they've got lots of brilliant operationalized, um, methods and techniques. Um, so we've got the money in the city of London and they've got all the people who know how to do it. And so we've signed a partnership, uh, for some joint working between us. So again, this is, this was during climate week, but this is, this is what I mean about, you know, you say, where's nature showing up?Well, it's like, well, we don't want um, plastic bottles in the environment.
So what are we going to do in terms of the recycling side?There's this even here, there's a bit of an artificial distinction between climate and nature. And actually everything's connected.
16:35
16:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you very much indeed. And we hope that the your Dutch counterparts get an opportunity to read the times so they can see all the information that's in the report. But Minister Craig and Miss Eels and colleagues, thank you very much indeed, uh, for your attendance today. This sitting is suspended. Order, order!