Select committee: Defence Committee
Eighth Report - Defence and Climate Change
HC 179
Published 18 August 2023
Defence Committee Defence and Climate Change Report on parliament.uk ↗
At a glance4 recommendations and 12 conclusions · Government response published 8 November 2023 (deadline 18 October 2023)
The government's response
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.
The MOD welcomes the inquiry and says its climate work is "already aligned to many of the Inquiry's recommendations", while stating that it will "never damage our national security for the sake of sustainability targets".
- On the Committee's recommendation for more demanding Science Based Targets, the MOD says it is "currently not planning on using Science Based Targets", because they "could undermine or drive perverse decisions" about current capabilities.
- On independent verification of emissions and a standalone annual climate report, it says there are "no plans" for either, citing the scale and complexity of its activities for verification.
- On separate emissions reporting by Top Level Budget holders, the MOD says only that it "will assess whether" these organisations' emissions "should also be reported" in its Annual Reports and Accounts.
- On the housing stock and MACA tasks, it commits to timed reviews: an accommodation investment strategy review "planned to conclude by the end of 2023" and a DSTL review of MACA and HADR activity "to be complete by end 2023".
What the committee recommended 16
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Sources
- Eighth Report - Defence and Climate Change ↗The committee's report, HC 179, parliament.uk
- First Special Report - Defence and Climate Change ↗The government's response, 8 November 2023, parliament.uk
Recommendations and conclusions 16
-
1
Assess Joint Expeditionary Force adaptation needs for climate change developments in the Arctic. Conclusion (the committee's words)The increasing exploitation of the Arctic for international trade and exploration for critical minerals gives greater importance to the role of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) as a security alliance in the ‘High North’. The Ministry of Defence should assess how the JEF might need to be adapted in the face of climate-change induced developments in the Arctic and beyond.
-
2
Military equipment and training require urgent adaptation for extreme temperatures and emissions. Conclusion (the committee's words)Military equipment will need to be adapted to operate effectively under the more extreme temperature ranges that are predicted, as well to help reduce emissions, although this should be achieved without compromising military capability. This process cannot be delayed; more than a 1,000 new tanks and other armoured vehicles with conventional diesel engines will enter service in the next few years and will still be in service after the 2050 net zero target. Armed Forces training will also need to be adapted in the face of rising global temperatures, so military readiness to respond to crises is not eroded.
-
3
Undertake research to adapt UK Armed Forces operations for future extreme climatic conditions. Recommendation (the committee's words)Defence should undertake research and assess best practice from academia, industry, allies and partners on operating in demanding environments and ensure all Defence Lines of Development are suitably adapted to continue to allow UK Armed Forces to operate effectively across more extreme climatic conditions over the coming decades. It should also push hard to reduce carbon emissions from its equipment, without eroding military capability.
-
4
Set out investment opportunities for fitting low-carbon energy on defence estates by 2030. Recommendation (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence should set out the balance of investment opportunities around accelerating the fitting of low-carbon energy sources to the defence estate in the UK and abroad to achieve ‘estate net zero’ by 2030. Although this will require additional initial capital outlay, it should reduce whole-life costs and carbon emissions and increase Defence’s energy resilience and self-sufficiency.
-
5
Investment analysis on housing stock could improve service personnel retention and living conditions. Conclusion (the committee's words)This balance of investment analysis should also be applied to the housing stock as, in conjunction with wider upgrades, it could enhance the living conditions of Service personnel and their families, thereby improving retention.
-
6
Assess whether Armed Forces reductions will likely reduce capacity for MACA tasks. Conclusion (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence should assess whether continued reductions in the size of the Armed Forces will likely result in Defence accepting fewer MACA tasks requested by Government over the coming decades, and if so should ensure wider Government is fully aware of the implications of this, including the need for alternative non-regular- forces capacity.
-
7
UK's potential global leadership role in military climate adaptation requires significant resources. Conclusion (the committee's words)Undertaking the role of global leader is not easy. Rear Admiral Paul Beattie, Director Naval Staff, Royal Navy, recently described the measures necessary for climate change adaption in the military as the “… biggest change programme in defence”. He noted that, unusually for technology, countries “can’t look to the US” for global leadership and that some were therefore looking to the UK. However, such a role 32 Defence and Climate Change requires considerable resources, and time, so was not a decision to be taken lightly. Influencing with UK partners through international organisations such as NATO and the UN could provide a helpful approach.
-
8
Encourage UN and IPCC to update military emissions reporting and urge NATO transparency. Recommendation (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence should work with other UK government partners to encourage the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to update their reporting framework so emissions from military fuel use and other activities are set out in National Inventory Reports. The Ministry of Defence should also urge NATO to increase its transparency and publish its methodology for accounting for greenhouse gas emissions.
-
9
Measuring total defence carbon emissions provides a gold standard for military reporting. Conclusion (the committee's words)Measuring and reporting against the total defence carbon emission figure would support both the Government’s agenda of reducing emissions to net zero by 2050, but also provide a gold standard of military emissions reporting for other countries to emulate. Good practice would be to ensure these figures are independently verified.
-
10
Publish in-depth annual review of Defence climate performance and explain reporting discrepancies. Recommendation (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence should return to publishing a more in-depth, stand-alone annual review of its climate and sustainability performance, with independent verification of emissions measuring and reporting. It should commission work to better understand total defence carbon emissions. It should also explain the apparent discrepancy in reporting overall emission figures in 2019–20 and again in 2020–21, and then reporting those same (now historic) figures again in the 2021–22 Annual Report but with values that have increased by over 40%.
-
11
Ensure Defence sets more demanding Greening Government Commitments targets for 2025-2030. Conclusion (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence is in line to achieve its Greening Government Commitments’ carbon reduction targets early, but these are insufficiently demanding. It appears that the Ministry can meet its targets entirely by taking advantage of the decarbonisation of the National Grid. Targets are hardly stretching if they can be met without any effort, especially for a department that produces half of all central government emissions. For the next round of Greening Government Commitments from 2025– 2030, Defence should ensure its targets are more demanding and accompanied by plans to achieve them.
-
12
Adopt Science-Based Targets for Defence and develop carbon reduction plans for suppliers. Conclusion (the committee's words)We welcome the Ministry of Defence’s efforts to expand coverage of carbon emissions, but more needs to be achieved to ensure all Defence emissions are measured. Best commercial practice for promoting emissions reductions and net-zero targets are the Science Based Targets initiatives (SBTi), which can also apply to major suppliers along with carbon reduction plans. The Ministry of Defence, therefore, should look to adopt Science-Based Targets initiative-approved measures for Defence and major suppliers, and develop carbon reduction plans for major suppliers.
-
13
Other Defence organisations lack detailed plans to achieve net zero by 2050. Conclusion (the committee's words)We note with interest the RAF setting itself a demanding target for reducing carbon emissions—a decade ahead of the Government’s 2050 goal—and look forward to examining the detailed plan for how it will be achieved. The RAF has also set out clear milestones towards achieving its 2040 ambition, aiming for a net zero airbase by 2025 and a net zero RAF estate by 2030, but milestones are not plans and Defence and Climate Change 33 programmes. We have not seen similar plans setting out milestones and targets for all other Top-Level Budget holders and enabling organisations to achieve net zero by 2050.
-
14
Require Defence organisations to report emissions separately and set 5-year reduction targets. Conclusion (the committee's words)Nor do the various organisations within Defence separately report their emissions publicly, so gauging progress towards their targets is not yet possible. Top-Level Budget holders and other significant enabling organisations should report their emissions separately starting with the 2023–24 Annual Report & Accounts, with emission reduction targets ideally set over 5-year periods to match the GGC plan.
-
15
Dual responsibilities for MoD climate change director hinder urgent decarbonisation efforts. Conclusion (the committee's words)Given increasing scientific concerns around failing to hold to the 1.5° limit on warming and the need for Defence to transition from establishing a comprehensive baseline of carbon emissions in Epoch 1 to significantly reducing emissions in Epoch 2, having the climate change director also responsible for the Union and Levelling-Up in the Ministry of Defence may be too distracting for the important work that needs to be achieved at pace.
-
16
Appoint a dedicated Ministry of Defence climate change director for focused decarbonisation coordination. Conclusion (the committee's words)The Ministry of Defence should appoint a dedicated climate change director who would be able to fully focus on coordinating carbon reductions across the whole of Defence, including holding separate commands and organisations to account for progress in reducing emissions against their individual goals and measuring and reporting that progress in a timely manner.