Speeches by Gardiner.

“If we make a recommendation like that, the Government will come back and say, “Yes, but we have improved this with the eco-designed wood burners.” Pray tell us how eco those eco-designed wood burners are. Are they 450 times worse than a gas boiler? Is that what you will tell me?”

“I wanted to come on to that, so that is a nice segue. The environmental indicator framework shows changes in the estimated emissions of five key pollutants. Tell us about the other emerging pollutants that we could push higher up the priority level.”

“I do not know if it was you, Ruth, but the Green Alliance wrote something called “How much action is in the UK’s methane action plan?” Could you summarise what it said?”

“Yes, but if we were saving the billions that Professor Clift wanted to put a nought on the end of, it might pay for itself. Ms Lockwood, in written evidence to the Committee, it was noted that domestic combustion is the second largest contributor to primary PM2.5, and wood burning is a significant contributor to that. …”

“Thank you very much. On indoor air pollution, you talked about a French example in response to Ms Denyer, and you said they were adopting a little-by-little approach. As part of this Committee’s recommendations, rather than asking the Government to take a big bang approach to indoor air pollution, I was struck by what …”

“Of course, you talked about the in-utero impacts in your opening remarks. Explain to the Committee what it is about these ultra-fine particles that means they can affect even your baby in the womb.”

“Tell me about soot, or what the posh people now call black carbon. We used to call it soot when we unloaded the coal from the fire.”

“That sounds to me suspiciously like the DEFRA consultation on domestic wood burning. Of course, it has not proposed a phase out of wood burning in urban areas, which is what you and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health have proposed. It has simply proposed labelling and information. Again, crystallise this…”

“I was trying to probe the key pollutants that may be lower down the priority list. We do not have soot high on that priority list, but perhaps we should. It would be helpful if you can explain why that might be the case.”

“But you are the Forestry Commission guy here, aren’t you?”

“I understand the security within the scheme. I am more concerned about when the land is sold. Because it is a personal contract, there is no obligation on the new landowner to continue and deliver that, and there is no security of sequestration of the carbon in perpetuity.”

“Great. That is really helpful; thank you. We understand that a large amount of timber plantations on ancient woodlands are due to be harvested over the next five years. Mr Tubby, could you tell us how you expect those sites to be harvested and replanted, and what environmental impact you think that will have?”

“Where to start? Dr Weatherall, perhaps I can start with you. You talked about the importance of financial incentive. I think it has been very clear from the panel that we have an asset value and, if you like, a natural capital value. You suggested that there might be small grants available to incentivise private landow…”

“In terms of the scheme itself—putting ancient woodland to one side—what recommendations should the Committee make to ensure that these projects do not die with the landowner, as it were, or when the land is sold on?”

“Right, so this is not going to help. As it stands, it would not be of use to help ancient woodland.”

“That is very helpful—thank you. Finally, Mr Tubby, the Forestry Commission has three principles that you operate to: management, production and conservation. Do you believe that the Forestry Commission has got those in the right balance?”

“You have those thresholds, as it were, for the PIUs and WCUs.”

“At five and 15 years.”

“Yes, of course. That is part of a restoration project, isn’t it?”

“You could use that, then. Let’s say an ancient woodland had been damaged and a third of it lost, in the way that you suggest. If you were planting new broadleaf species there to extend that woodland, would that not count under the carbon code?”