*CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY* Baroness Jan Royall of Blaisdon, Leader of the Opposition, House of Lords Speech to open debate

on the report of the Independent Panel on Forestry, 12th February 2014 My Lords, you may wonder why, when all has been quiet on the forest front for some time, I tabled this Question for Short Debate. Well, the long silence was my catalyst. It is over 18 months since the Independent Panel on Forestry published its excellent report and more than a year since the Government published its Forestry and Woodlands Policy Statement which incorporated its response to that report. It is also almost the anniversary of the debate initiated by the Rt Revd Prelate, the Bishop of Liverpool, who did such a splendid job as chair of the Independent Panel and who we miss greatly. I am delighted that the Rt Revd Prelates the Bishop of Worcester and the Bishop of St Albans are speaking today. I can see the diocese of the former from the Forest of Dean and the former Bishop of St Albans, Bishop Christopher, was born in the Forest so I feel a very strong link! Bishops up and down the country, including my own Bishop of Gloucester and my friend and almost neighbour, the former Bishop of Guildford, have done a superb job in supporting our forests and woodlands. My own interest in this issue is clear and strong. I live in the Forest of Dean, I am a Forester, and I am proud of our strong community and our thriving culture and traditions which are rooted in the Forest. Indeed, We like the trees seek the light was my schools motto. I am also a member of the steering committee of Hands Off Our Forest (HOOF), the campaign that led the country in its fight against the sale of our forests, when people from all parts of the country and all walks of life rose in protest. In its statement published last January the Government said that it would establish via legislation a new, operationally-independent Public Forest Estate management body to hold the Estate in trust for the nation. It will be charged with generating a greater proportion of its income through appropriate commercial activity and with maximising the social, environmental and economic value of the assets under its care. There was much anticipation and I know that DEFRA has had many discussions, including with the National Forestry Forum, but my Lords there has been no action. The Noble Lord, the Minister, told me in a letter of 6th January, for which I am grateful, that we remain committed to bringing forward legislation to establish the new public body to manage the Public Forest Estate when parliamentary time allows and that we intend to subject draft legislation on this matter to full Pre-Legislative Scrutiny. I welcome both of those commitments but I cannot accept that the legislation has not been forthcoming because of lack of parliamentary time. The 1

Commons have been twiddling their legislative thumbs for weeks, with most of their days filled with backbench and Opposition debates. There was plenty of time to undertake pre-legislative scrutiny on a draft Bill and then perhaps make the Bill a carry-over. As everyone, including the Minister, recognises there needs to be long consultation of a Bill that in essence determines the future of our forests and woodlands and I fear that the Government is now running out of time. I would be grateful for an assurance that a Bill will be announced in the Queens speech and for an assurance that adequate time will be made available for consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny before it begins its legislative process through both Houses. I am conscious of the fact that, knowing that the general election will take place in 448 days times, time is of the essence. Noble Lords may wonder why I am so anxious to have a Bill. People living in and around our forests, people who enjoy all that they have to offer and the fantastic people who work for the Forestry Commission are concerned about lack of action. Everyone was delighted by the Governments very positive response to the Independent Panels report and were delighted by the commitment to retaining the public forest estate in public ownership and to expanding it. But what now? There is a feeling of uncertainty and insecurity. The Forestry Commission is still doing a magnificent job but their challenges grow by the day as their numbers dwindle. I would be grateful if the Minister could update us on the number of people currently working for the Commission, the number of jobs lost since 2010 and the number of jobs that are still to be lost. I realise that all departments have had to make cuts and that the burdens on DEFRA are immense due to the floods, burdens which are likely to be increased as a result of climate change, but the management of our forests and woodlands should be a priority, not least because of their role in a low carbon economy and climate change mitigation. We should not forget that the Forestry Commission is the largest provider of countryside recreation opportunities in England which have a real impact on the physical and mental health and wellbeing of the nation. In answer to an oral question in December about the responsibilities of the Forestry Commission in relation to disease prevention, control and elimination the Minister said that this was one of the Departments top four priorities. That was good news but it would be helpful to have some more details not just reassurance. My Lords, I turn to the new, operationally-independent Public Forest Estate (PFE) management body to hold the estate in trust for the nation and manage its resources effectively to maximise the value of the land, trees and other assets under its care as mentioned in the Forestry and Woodlands Policy Statement Implementation Plan. I would remind Noble Lords of the

recommendation from the Independent Panel that: We propose that the public forest estate should remain in public ownership and be defined in statute as land held in trust for the nation. A Charter should be created for the English public forest estate, to be renewed every ten years. The Charter should specify the public benefit mission and statutory duties, and should be delivered through a group of Guardians or Trustees, who will be accountable to Parliament. The Guardians will oversee the new public forest management organisation evolved from Forest Enterprise England. DEFRA has published 10 core principles for the PFE Management Body which are welcome and reflect much of the ethos of the Independent Report although they lack one core duty which was recommended: to promote, expand and enhance public access to woodlands. I would be grateful for an assurance from the Minister that this important principle has not been lost. That notwithstanding, they appear to offer a welcome framework but no information has been forthcoming about the Body itself and that raises concerns for many people in the Forest of Dean and I suspect the people of Cannock Chase, Sherwood Forest and Delamere Forest to name but a few. I would be grateful if the Noble Lord the Minister could say what sort of PFE management body is being proposed and whether it is in line with the panels recommendations. There are rumours that the body will be a public corporation with an executive board. If this were the case there will be much anxiety about the future of our forests and the potential threat of future privatisation. I well understand that the Government has categorically said that the Public Forest Estate must remain in public ownership and I am grateful, but I think it imperative that the necessary safeguards are in place to ensure that our public forests are truly secure, and I have to say that establishing a body that could be prey to future privatisation does not provide that security. Indeed, I would suggest that the setting up of a public corporation could facilitate rather than inhibit future privatisation of the estate in whole or in part. And what about the membership of the board? I would ask for an assurance that it would be a mixed board which would have proper representation of stakeholders, for example Forest communities, NGOs and Forest industries. Naturally I recognise that the Board must consider economic objectives as well as public value, with commercial freedoms whilst protecting the estate, but there must be a balance and this balance must be reflected in the membership of the Board. The body must value the estate in terms of wildlife, access, recreation, education and cultural heritage as well as considering income generation. Clearly the Chair of the Board would be pivotal and I wonder if it is too early to ask who would appoint the Chair? 3

My Lords, I mentioned earlier the Charter and the Guardians which were crucial recommendations from the Panel. I understand that it is the Governments intention to publish a Charter alongside a draft Bill. This must mean that the Charter will have no statutory authority and I wonder whether or not it will be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny? I very much hope that it will be. Its purpose is too important to relegate it to a mere mission statement. I believe that the role of the Guardians is fundamental to the protection of the Public Forest Estate but also to public confidence. The Independent Panel were clear that their role was vital but I fear that the Government is intent on watering down their envisaged role. A right to appeal to the Secretary of State against decisions taken by the Board of the new public body is simply not enough. They need powers to intervene when decisions are taken by the Board which are detrimental to the Public Forest Estate, for example in relation to land sales. Could the Minister confirm that it is currently the Governments intention that the Secretary of State will be the only person with the power of veto on land disposals or change of land use? My Lords, I realise that we have travelled a long way since the publication of the original Public Bodies Bill in 2010 and I pay tribute to the way in which the Government has listened, consulted and embraced many of the challenges set by the Bishop of Liverpool and his colleagues. But we are still on a journey and neither my Party nor my friends in the Forest will rest until we are confident that the future of our publicly owned forests and woodlands is truly secure, and this means confidence in the establishment of the new management body, the Charter and the Guardians. I have to agree with the RSPB expressed concern in their very good briefing that the recommendations of the Independent Panel are being lost in translation during the Bill drafting stages. And I would urge the Government to maintain the integrity of the recommendations in the draft Bill that I hope that it will bring forward in the very near future. This really would demonstrate that Ministers can see the wood for the trees. I will finish by thanking the Noble Lord the Minister and all Noble Lords for participating in this short debate and by quoting the poetic words of Bishop James: Our forests and woods are natures playground for the adventurous, museum for the curious, hospital for the stressed, cathedral for the spiritual, and a livelihood for the entrepreneur. They are a microcosm of the cycle of life in which each and every part is dependent on the other; forest and woods are the benefactor of all, purifying the air that we breathe and distilling the water of life. In short, trees are for life. ENDS 4