My Lords, I declare my interest as co-chair of Peers for the Planet and will speak to Amendments 85 and 87 in my name in this group. I also apologise as this is the first time I have spoken on this Bill, having not been present at Second Reading, but I read the debate with great interest.
I have tabled amendments to this Bill with three goals in mind: first, to try to embed a consideration of the climate change crisis facing us and the environmental goals we must meet into primary legislation. It is important that this appears on the face of the Bill rather than in a yet to be approved policy statement to show the long-term leadership and clarity around tackling these issues, given that public procurement is such a huge lever on both these issues. Secondly, I am seeking to put climate and nature-positive procurement processes in from the very outset of preliminary market engagement and embed it throughout the award criteria setting process to appointment. Thirdly, I want to bring greater transparency to the process and visibility so that all can see how this important lever is being deployed.
The Climate Change Committee highlighted in its recent progress report to Parliament the importance of ensuring that all procurement decisions by all government departments are aligned with our net-zero goals. My amendments seek to address this recommendation. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts and
ask if he would agree to meet myself and other supportive Peers to discuss whether these amendments might be supported.
Amendments 85 and 87 relate to Part 3 of the Bill, under Clause 15, “Preliminary market engagement”. They aim to bring in an ambition to the new procurement regime to positively reward and incentivise those suppliers who are innovating and providing climate-positive and nature-positive sustainable products and services. I am very grateful for the interventions of the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, who I think is seeking to achieve a similar goal: to open this market to new entrants and providers. We cannot stay with the status quo; we must see a transition of our economy towards a more sustainable future. This offers government at every level a very important lever. I hope that it would bring economic benefits for business and wider society if we were to do this.
I am very grateful for the cross-party support of the noble Baronesses, Lady Verma, Lady Boycott and Lady Parminter, on these two amendments.
7.15 pm
Amendments 85 and 87 would ensure that, at the preliminary market engagement stage,
“contracting authorities engage with suppliers in relation to designing a procurement process that”
actively seeks out suppliers whose products and services
“maximise public good and encourage innovation … in pursuit of a sustainable and resilient society”,
planet and economy. Again, I am not wedded to the wording but simply want to ask the Minister whether there is interest in putting this in the Bill to be clear that this is not a continuation of business as usual and that this is a future-facing Bill seeking to change the issues we know are causing long-term problems.
I remind the Committee that the Cabinet Office’s impact assessment on the Bill estimates that the value of spend is approximately 10% of GDP. That suggests that this government procurement accounts for about 15% of emissions globally, so this lever is significant and important. With the support of Parliament, the Government have set themselves stretching targets in relation to climate and nature; as the progress report alluded to, we are not on track. We need a gear change if we are going to get back on track.
The net-zero strategy highlights the role of innovation and accelerating the UK’s transition to net zero, as well as the need to leverage public procurement as a tool that drives greener and more resilient outcomes across public services. This has been acknowledged as an important thing and further makes the case for this to be included on the face of the Bill.
The Government have already highlighted their willingness to use almost £300 billion of the annual procurement spend to advance broader policy objectives, saying in the NPPS that authorities should incorporate
“award criteria for comparing final bids and scoring their relative quality, to encourage ways of working and operational delivery that achieve social, economic and environmental benefits.”
As the Bill reads, we really only have the words “public good” to give us anything to hang from in defining that; I am sure that we will come on to debate that in further groupings. My amendment seeks simply to
operationalise these goals to ensure that, at the point at which we consider offering tenders, we think about the widest possible way in which they could be met, encourage innovation and do not simply settle for the business as it is.
I have great sympathy for Amendment 81, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire, and the need to introduce a further test to see how we can best meet our goals of public procurement and whether this is an important part of the process that seems to be missing. On that, I will sit down; thank you very much for your time.