Friends of the Earth welcomes the decision of the Committee to recall the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to give further oral evidence following the publication of the Government's response to the Committee's report Climate Change: the "citizen's agenda".

  There are several areas in which the Government's response to the Committee's report is inadequate, for example its over reliance on CERT as a mechanism to deliver improvements to the existing housing stock, rejection of a stamp duty rebate and assumption that tenanted properties can be dealt with a communications campaign rather than legislative action and stronger tax incentives, however the purpose of this note is not to respond in full to the Government's response but to offer some comments and information which might be useful in following up your report with the Secretary of State.

  The announcement by DEFRA on 18 November 2007 of £100 million of funding for a Green Homes Service looked like a positive move. Like many others Friends of the Earth has called on the Government to make it cheaper and easier for household's to cut their carbon emissions. Practical barriers to action by householders are considerable and this looks like a welcome scheme to take the hassle out of installing energy efficiency measures and microgeneration technologies. However details of the funding are uncertain and a number of questions arise. We would be very grateful if the Committee were able to put any of them to the Secretary of State:

  Firstly is the £100 million new money for the EST dedicated to providing the new service or is the £100 million a sum for total EST funding? The press release gives the impression that this is new money solely to support the Green Homes Service. It is Friends of the Earth's suspicion that it is not. If not, how much is genuinely new money being provided to the EST to pay for the new service?

  Secondly, is the £100 million an annual figure or is it spread over a number of years?

  Finally what will be the impact on the EST's existing network of advice centres of providing advice on a range of new topics? According to the DEFRA press release the EST will:" offer green advice to consumers on energy efficiency, renewable energy, travel, water efficiency and waste reduction." Friends of the Earth does not oppose the provision of advise on all these topics but is concerned that even £100 million annually of dedicated new funding for the service (which would be a very optimistic reading of the DEFRA release) would be entirely insufficient to provide the sort of comprehensive service that we believe should be available to every UK citizen. We are concerned that insufficient funding to provide advice on an expanded range of topics could impact negatively on the advice network overall.

  Friends of the Earth considers the Government's response to the Committee's report to be particularly poor on the issue of microgeneration. We were pleased to see a mention of feed-in tariffs in the DEFRA release of 18 November and a commitment that they will be "investigated". Friends of the Earth is calling for the introduction of a feed-in tariff to support the development of smaller scale renewable electricity. The DEFRA press release sits oddly with the Government's 15 November response to the Committee's report which seems to rule out a feed-in tariff.

  Similarly, Friends of the Earth supporters emailing the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform to support the introduction of a feed-in tariff have received a response which states: "a feed-in tariff is not appropriate for our liberalised energy market structure." A copy of the relevant emails and a letter sent by Friends of the Earth to Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks MP setting out the need for a feed-in tariff accompany this note.

  The refusal of the Government to seriously engage with the case for a feed-in tariff is frustrating. We do not see the evidence for the Government's statement in its response to the Committee's report that a feed-in tariff can be "very costly". In its response to the Renewables Obligation consultation Ofgem cites a study by the European Commission which found that the Renewables Obligation is a particularly expensive and inefficient policy for developing renewable electricity capacity compared with a feed-in tariff. It specifically asked the Government to examine how a feed-in tariff could work in a UK context. According to the Stern Review (page 366): "Comparisons between deployment support through tradable quotas and feed-in tariff price support suggest that feed-in mechanisms achieve larger deployment at lower costs."

  We agree with the Committee that clarification of DEFRA's statement that a feed-in tariff will be "investigated" is needed. It is our understanding that there is currently no work of any significance being undertaken in any Government department to examine the case for a feed-in tariff and that none is planned. If true, this is very disappointing.

  Friends of the Earth and the Co-operate Bank recently published a report by Dr Brenda Boardman of Oxford University's Environmental Change Institute which sets out a comprehensive strategy to cut carbon emissions from the UK's housing stock by 80 per cent by 2050 and eliminate fuel poverty. The report, "Home Truths", supports many of the Committee's conclusions in Climate Change: the "citizen's agenda". I have attached an electronic copy of the executive summary. I hope the report will be useful for any further work the Committee undertakes on this important topic.

Dave Timms

Economics Campaigner

Friends of the Earth

February 2008